Thus spake "Vadim Antonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > It makes little sense to detect transient glitches. Any possible reaction > on those glitches (i.e. withdrawal of exterior routes with subsequent > reinstatement) is more damaging than the glitches themselves.
(Ignoring BGP for the moment, which has no clue of the reliability of its links) That's due to the "slow down, fast up" nature of IETF protocols. Do you really want a link or routing protocol claiming your link is "up" if it passes only 33% of your keepalives? IMHO, the key to fast-response protocols is reversing this behavior: require (say) 10 keepalives in a row for a link to be "up", and missing one forces it "down". S
