North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: 64 Megs of Memory...

  • From: goemon
  • Date: Sun Oct 22 20:25:12 2000

On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Mark Milhollan wrote:
> [Sorry for the delay.]
> Dan Hollis writes:
> >On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Mark Milhollan wrote:
> >> ``maximum-prefix n p warning-only'' along with a log analyzer that
> >> recognizes the warning, are perhaps a better pair of friends.
> >How so? You recognize the warning, now what?
> Deliver the notice to NOC personel, via whatever means.  Perhaps they'll
> terminate the session.  Perhaps not.  Granted in warning-only mode the
> session won't come back up by itself.

And how exactly is this better than a maximum-prefix clause which drops
routes instead of dropping the session?

With your proposal, by the time the warning has been tripped and the
notice delivered to the NOC the routes have probably already gone over
the limit and the cisco already dropped the BGP session.