Internet Engineering Task Force S. Tsuchiya, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Intended status: Informational S. Kawamura
Expires: September 8, 2011 NEC BIGLOBE, Ltd.
R. Bush
C. Pelsser
Internet Initiative Japan, Inc.
March 7, 2011
Route Flap Damping Implement Survey
draft-shishio-grow-isp-rfd-implement-survey-00
Abstract
Route Flap Damping RFC2439 is a mecanism for BGProute improve the
stability and reduce the load of CPU of the core routers.
But it has side-effect,so RIPE has not recommended use of Route Flap
Damping on RIPE-378 since May 2006.
On the other hand,there are some reserch reports to improve RFC2439
such as draft-ymbk-rfd-usable.
This documentation describes the survey of current service provider
Route Flap Damping implementation.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 8, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Tsuchiya, et al. Expires September 8, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Route Flap Damping Implement Survey March 2011
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Survey Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Survey object and period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. For Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Survey Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Q1.Do you use Route Flap Damping ? . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1.1. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1.2. All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Q2.If you select No on Q1,why? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.1. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.2. All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Q3.If you select Yes on Q1,what parameter do you use? . . . 4
3.3.1. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3.2. All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4. Q4.Do you know Randy Bush et. al report Route Flap
Damping Considered Useable? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4.1. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4.2. All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.5. Q5.IOS's max-penalty is currently limited to 20K. Do
you need this limitation relaxed to over 50K? . . . . . . . 6
3.5.1. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.5.2. All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6. Q6.If you have any comments,please comment in below. . . . 6
3.6.1. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6.2. All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix A. Additional Stuff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Tsuchiya, et al. Expires September 8, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Route Flap Damping Implement Survey March 2011
1. Survey Purpose
RIPE published some recommendations such as RIPE-178 [RIPE-178],RIPE-
210 [RIPE-210],RIPE-229 [RIPE-229] and RIPE-378 [RIPE-378].
This survey purpose are usage of Route Flap Damping [RFC2439],and
which parameter service providers used.
2. Survey object and period
2.1. For Japan
Object:Japan Network Operator Group janog@janog.gr.jp
Period:Jan 28,2011-Feb 12,2011
2.2. All
Object:people who looked this documents
Period:Mar 7,2011-May 25,2011
Please open below url,and answer the question.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/rfd-survey
3. Survey Result
3.1. Q1.Do you use Route Flap Damping ?
YES
NO
3.1.1. Japan
YES:5
NO:13
1 was skipped this question
3.1.2. All
YES:TBD
Tsuchiya, et al. Expires September 8, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Route Flap Damping Implement Survey March 2011
NO:TBD
3.2. Q2.If you select No on Q1,why?
Don't Need
Don't know
It's not mean.
It would be complaint for customers
Because I read RIPE-378 [RIPE-378].
other
3.2.1. Japan
Don't Need:3
Don't know:2
It's not mean:3
It would be complaint for customers:1
Because I read RIPE-378 [RIPE-378]:2
other:3
3.2.2. All
Don't Need:TBD
Don't know:TBD
It's not mean:TBD
It would be complaint for customers:TBD
Because I read RIPE-378 [RIPE-378]:TBD
other:TBD
3.3. Q3.If you select Yes on Q1,what parameter do you use?
Default parameter of router
Tsuchiya, et al. Expires September 8, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Route Flap Damping Implement Survey March 2011
RIPE-178 [RIPE-178]
RIPE-210 [RIPE-210]
RIPE-229 [RIPE-229]
other
3.3.1. Japan
Default parameter of router:3
RIPE-178 [RIPE-178]:0
RIPE-210 [RIPE-210]:0
RIPE-229 [RIPE-229]:0
other:3
1 person answered Q3,even if selected No on Q1.
3.3.2. All
Default parameter of router:TBD
RIPE-178 [RIPE-178]:TBD
RIPE-210 [RIPE-210]:TBD
RIPE-229 [RIPE-229]:TBD
other:TBD
3.4. Q4.Do you know Randy Bush et. al report Route Flap Damping
Considered Useable?
YES
NO
3.4.1. Japan
YES:12
NO:7
1 who is skiped Q1,but answered Q4.
Tsuchiya, et al. Expires September 8, 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Route Flap Damping Implement Survey March 2011
3.4.2. All
YES:TBD
NO:TBD
3.5. Q5.IOS's max-penalty is currently limited to 20K. Do you need this
limitation relaxed to over 50K?
YES
NO
3.5.1. Japan
YES:10
NO:9
3.5.2. All
YES:TBD
NO:TBD
3.6. Q6.If you have any comments,please comment in below.
free format
3.6.1. Japan
TBD
3.6.2. All
TBD
4. Acknowledgements
We appreciate 19 people who answered this survey on Japan. We would
like to thanks Chika Yoshimura,Yutaka Kikuchi are responced on janog
mailing list.
5. IANA Considerations
This document has no actions for IANA.
Tsuchiya, et al. Expires September 8, 2011 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Route Flap Damping Implement Survey March 2011
6. Security Considerations
This document has no security considerations.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2439] "BGP Route Flap Damping",
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2439>.
7.2. Informative References
[RIPE-178]
""RIPE Routing-WG Recommendation for coor-dinated route-
flap damping parameters"",
<ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-178.txt>.
[RIPE-210]
""RIPE Routing-WG Recommendation for coordinated route-
flap damping parameters"",
<ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-210.txt>.
[RIPE-229]
""RIPE Routing-WG Recommendations for Coordinated Route-
flap Damping Parameters"",
<ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-229.txt>.
[RIPE-378]
""RIPE Routing Working Group Recommendations On Route-flap
Damping"", <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-378>.
[draft-ymbk-rfd-usable]
""Making Route Flap Damping Usable"",
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ymbk-rfd-usable>.
Appendix A. Additional Stuff
This becomes an Appendix.
Tsuchiya, et al. Expires September 8, 2011 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Route Flap Damping Implement Survey March 2011
Authors' Addresses
Shishio Tsuchiya (editor)
Cisco Systems
Shinjuku Mitsui Building, 2-1-1, Nishi-Shinjuku
Shinjuku-Ku, Tokyo 163-0409
Japan
Phone: +81 3 6434 6543
Email: shtsuchi@cisco.com
Seiichi Kawamura
NEC BIGLOBE, Ltd.
14-22, Shibaura 4-chome
Minatoku, Tokyo 108-8558
JAPAN
Phone: +81 3 3798 6085
Email: kawamucho@mesh.ad.jp
Randy Bush
Internet Initiative Japan, Inc.
5147 Crystal Springs
Bainbridge Island, Washington 98110
US
Phone: +1 206 780 0431 x1
Email: randy@psg.com
Cristel Pelsser
Internet Initiative Japan, Inc.
Jinbocho Mitsui Buiding, 1-105
Kanda-Jinbocho, Chiyoda-kun 101-0051
JP
Phone: +81 3 5205 6464
Email: cristel@iij.ad.jp
Tsuchiya, et al. Expires September 8, 2011 [Page 8]