Community discussions

 
User avatar
Bergante
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:27 pm
Location: Bilbao, Spain

Feature request: BFD for static routes

Tue May 15, 2018 4:21 pm

Hi,

Checking the BFD documentation I am surprised that the simplest use case for BFD is not supported: using it to check the validity of a static route without using a routing protocol (BGP or OSPF).

This feature would be extremely useful. Nowadays many Internet services use complex circuits that may traverse several networks and most failures won't cause a link down event. I know there is Netwatch, but it only applies to one side.

Other router manufacturers such as Juniper have a very nice feature: adding a bfd-keepalive. Something like...
 set static route 192.168.1.0/29 next-hop 10.0.1.1 bfd-liveness-detection neighbor 10.0.1.1
This example doesn't require BGP or OSPF to operate. In Mikrotik terms it could be something like...
/ip route add dst-address=192.168.1.0/29  next-hop 10.0.1.1 bfd-neighbor=10.0.1.1 bfd-interval=0.2s bfd-min-rx=0.5s bfd-multiplier=5
This would be a real improvement!

Someone will say that Netwatch or check-gateway do exactly the same, but they don't. The advantage of BFD is that both ends of a link (imagine that there is another brand of router at the other end like Juniper or Cisco) will detect a broken connection. With Netwatch or check-gateway only the Mikrotik side will notice.
 
syadnom
Member
Member
Posts: 370
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:29 am

Re: Feature request: BFD for static routes

Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:59 am

upvote.

also expanding on the netwatch, it's not fast enough AND it's CPU utilization is WAY too high. I did a simple netwatch to ping an off-net address and file the distance on a route, running this in even 1 second intervals adds ~10% CPU load. Not good enough. Now get it down to .1*3 second BFD defaults and we're talking 30% CPU.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests