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", . 7.2. Informative References [RIPE-178] ""RIPE Routing-WG Recommendation for coor-dinated route- flap damping parameters"", . [RIPE-210] ""RIPE Routing-WG Recommendation for coordinated route- flap damping parameters"", . [RIPE-229] ""RIPE Routing-WG Recommendations for Coordinated Route- flap Damping Parameters"", . [RIPE-378] ""RIPE Routing Working Group Recommendations On Route-flap Damping"", . [draft-ymbk-rfd-usable] ""Making Route Flap Damping 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]