BFD on back-to-back connected BGP-speakers

Tue Nov 29 18:23:41 UTC 2016

Good morning, nanog,

Is there any/sufficient benefit in adding BFD onto BGP sessions between
directly-connected routers?  If we have intermediate L2 devices such that 
we can't reliably detect link failures BFD can help us quickly detect peers 
going away even when link remains up, but what about sessions with:

- eBGP with peering to interface addresses (not loopback)
- no multi-hop
- direct back-to-back connections (no intermediate devices except patch 
   panels)

Possible failure scenarios where I could see this helping would be fat 
fingering (filters implemented on one or the other side drops traffic from 
the peer) or e.g. something catastrophic that causes the control plane to 
go away without any last gasp to the peer.

Or is adding BFD into the mix in this type of setup getting into increasing 
effort/complexity (an additional protocol) for dimishing returns?

-- 
Hugo Slabbert       | email, xmpp/jabber: hugo at slabnet.com
pgp key: B178313E   | also on Signal

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20161129/12381115/attachment.sig>