North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Converged Networks Threat (Was: Level3 Outage)
David Meyer wrote:
I think you hit the nail on the head. I view complexity as diminishing returns play. When you increase complexity, the increase does benefit a decreasing percentage of the users. A way to manage complexity is splitting large systems into smaller pieces and try to make the pieces independent enough to survive a failure of neighboring piece. This approach exists at least in the marketing materials of many telecommunications equipment vendors. The question then becomes, "what good is a backbone router without BGP process". So far I haven�t seen a router with a disposable entity on interface or peer basis. So if a BGP speaker to 10.1.1.1 crashes the system would still be able to maintain relationship to 10.2.2.2. Obviously the point of single device availability becomes moot if we can figure out a way to route/switch around the failed device quickly enough. Today we don�t even have a generic IP layer liveness protocol so by default packets will be blackholed for a definite duration until a routing protocol starts to miss it�s hello packets. (I�m aware of work towards this goal)
In summary, I feel systems should be designed to run independent in all failure modes. If you lose 1-n neighbors the system should be self-sufficient on figuring out near-immediately the situation, continue working while negotiating with neighbors about the overall picture.