> On 21/07/2019, at 6:26 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> wrote: > > > > On 20/Jul/19 18:56, Per Westerlund wrote: >> Using BFD instead of LACP for link monitoring? > > I wouldn't say BFD is an alternative to LACP, but yes, we do use BFD on > all backbone links. > > Also, BFD is broken in LAG scenarios.
I agree with you generally - that multiple links is better than LAG in the core for a bunch of reasons. However, the issues I’m aware of with BFD on LAGs are dealt with by Micro BFD on each LAG member. Is there something more that I’m not aware of which Micro BFD doesn’t solve? -- Nathan Ward _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
