Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-10-02 Thread Nick Boyadjiev

Dear Colleagues,

Sorry for the late response.

The problem was due to faulty firmware on one of our Alaxala routers.
We resolved the problem the same day (Aug. 18) by downgrading firmware.

For more details, please see Alaxala page here (English):

http://www.alaxala.com/en/information/20090827.html

If you have filters etc. blocking AS9354, please remove them.

Thank you,

Nick Boyadjiev
AS9354 Nagoya JAPAN




Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-20 Thread Joe Provo
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:37:22AM +0200, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote:
  Anybody have a handy route-map that will deny anything with a 
  as-path longer than say 15-20? ;-)
 
 http://wiki.nil.com/Filter_excessively_prepended_BGP_paths

It will still be a while before we see unbroken 4byte AS behavior 
(that whole 'fix the teardown on a anyone sneezing' problem). But
like with stale bogon filters, I expect folks inclined to use this
to drop it in and forget about it.  So it would be wise to adjust 
the recommended filter to anticipate a 2byteAS view allowing multiple 
instances of AS-TRANS; there's likely a more elegant approach, but 
the quick step of explicitly allowing _(23465_)+ before you deny
_([0-9]+)_\1_\1_\1_\1_

Cheers,

Joe


-- 
 RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE



Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-20 Thread Nathan Ward

On 19/08/2009, at 6:58 AM, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote:

No. You cannot influence the inbound traffic apart from not  
advertising some
of your prefixes to some of your neighbors or giving them hints with  
BGP
communities or AS-path prepending. Whatever you do with BGP on your  
routers

influences only the paths the outbound traffic is taking. What you'd
actually need is remote-triggered black hole. Search the Nanog  
archives for
RTBH, you'll find a number of links in a message from Frank Bulk  
sent a few

days ago.



Or, you can prepend your advertisement with the troublesome ASN.

Works for one or two troublesome ASNs as a quick hack at 3am - don't  
do it unless you understand why it works and why you shouldn't do it.


--
Nathan Ward




RE: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-18 Thread Ivan Pepelnjak
 Anybody have a handy route-map that will deny anything with a 
 as-path longer than say 15-20? ;-)

http://wiki.nil.com/Filter_excessively_prepended_BGP_paths

Ivan
 
http://www.ioshints.info/about
http://blog.ioshints.info/




RE: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-18 Thread Dylan Ebner
Ivan-
   Thanks for posting this how-to on excessive as prepends. I have a couple of 
questions that some of the less BGP savvy out their may find helpfull

1. In my enviornment, we are not doing full routes. We have partial routes from 
AS209 and then fail to AS7263. Is their any advantage for someone like me to do 
this, as we are not providing any IP transit so we are not passing the route 
table to anyone else?

2. When I run the sh ip bgp quote-regexp _([0-9]+)_\1_\1_\1_\1_ \1_ | begin 
Network I am seeing many many ASes that would be filtered by this access-list. 
What happens to those networks, are they unreachable from my AS, or do I just 
route those networks to my upstream provider and let them deal with it?

3. This last question is a little OT, but relates to your access list
   In the event of some kind if DOS attack coming from one of a few AS numbers 
(in this case we will use 14793), what is the feesability of using 
 ip as-path access-list 100 deny _([0-9]+)_\1_\1_\1_\1_
 ip as-path access-list 100 deny 14793
 ip as-path access-list 100 permit .*

 Would this have any affect at all, or would my pipe from my upstream still be 
congested with garbage traffic ?



Thanks
Dylan Ebner



-Original Message-
From: Ivan Pepelnjak [mailto:i...@ioshints.info] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 2:37 AM
To: 'randal k'; 'Adam Hebert'
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

 Anybody have a handy route-map that will deny anything with a as-path 
 longer than say 15-20? ;-)

http://wiki.nil.com/Filter_excessively_prepended_BGP_paths

Ivan
 
http://www.ioshints.info/about
http://blog.ioshints.info/






RE: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-18 Thread Ivan Pepelnjak
 Ivan-
Thanks for posting this how-to on excessive as prepends. I 
 have a couple of questions that some of the less BGP savvy 
 out their may find helpfull
 
 1. In my enviornment, we are not doing full routes. We have 
 partial routes from AS209 and then fail to AS7263. Is their 
 any advantage for someone like me to do this, as we are not 
 providing any IP transit so we are not passing the route 
 table to anyone else?

You could do it to protect your BGP table, but as you're not a transit AS,
it does not make much sense.

 2. When I run the sh ip bgp quote-regexp 
 _([0-9]+)_\1_\1_\1_\1_ \1_ | begin Network I am seeing 
 many many ASes that would be filtered by this access-list. 

Obviously a lot of people are prepend-happy.

 What happens to those networks, are they unreachable from my 
 AS, or do I just route those networks to my upstream provider 
 and let them deal with it?

If I understood correctly, you're using a default route toward AS7263, which
means that anything that is not in your BGP table (and consequently your IP
routing table) will be sent out of your AS via the default route. If you're
getting the paths you're filtering from AS209 that means that more traffic
will go to AS7263.

 3. This last question is a little OT, but relates to your access list
In the event of some kind if DOS attack coming from one of 
 a few AS numbers (in this case we will use 14793), what is 
 the feesability of using 
  ip as-path access-list 100 deny _([0-9]+)_\1_\1_\1_\1_
  ip as-path access-list 100 deny 14793
  ip as-path access-list 100 permit .*
 
  Would this have any affect at all, or would my pipe from my 
 upstream still be congested with garbage traffic ?

No. You cannot influence the inbound traffic apart from not advertising some
of your prefixes to some of your neighbors or giving them hints with BGP
communities or AS-path prepending. Whatever you do with BGP on your routers
influences only the paths the outbound traffic is taking. What you'd
actually need is remote-triggered black hole. Search the Nanog archives for
RTBH, you'll find a number of links in a message from Frank Bulk sent a few
days ago.

Hope this helps
Ivan
 
http://www.ioshints.info/about
http://blog.ioshints.info/




RE: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-18 Thread Dylan Ebner
Ivan-
   This helps vey much.  

Thanks
Dylan Ebner


-Original Message-
From: Ivan Pepelnjak [mailto:i...@ioshints.info] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Dylan Ebner; 'randal k'; 'Adam Hebert'
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

 Ivan-
Thanks for posting this how-to on excessive as prepends. I have a 
 couple of questions that some of the less BGP savvy out their may find 
 helpfull
 
 1. In my enviornment, we are not doing full routes. We have partial 
 routes from AS209 and then fail to AS7263. Is their any advantage for 
 someone like me to do this, as we are not providing any IP transit so 
 we are not passing the route table to anyone else?

You could do it to protect your BGP table, but as you're not a transit AS, it 
does not make much sense.

 2. When I run the sh ip bgp quote-regexp _([0-9]+)_\1_\1_\1_\1_ \1_ 
 | begin Network I am seeing many many ASes that would be filtered by 
 this access-list.

Obviously a lot of people are prepend-happy.

 What happens to those networks, are they unreachable from my AS, or do 
 I just route those networks to my upstream provider and let them deal 
 with it?

If I understood correctly, you're using a default route toward AS7263, which 
means that anything that is not in your BGP table (and consequently your IP 
routing table) will be sent out of your AS via the default route. If you're 
getting the paths you're filtering from AS209 that means that more traffic will 
go to AS7263.

 3. This last question is a little OT, but relates to your access list
In the event of some kind if DOS attack coming from one of a few AS 
 numbers (in this case we will use 14793), what is the feesability of 
 using  ip as-path access-list 100 deny _([0-9]+)_\1_\1_\1_\1_  ip 
 as-path access-list 100 deny 14793  ip as-path access-list 100 permit 
 .*
 
  Would this have any affect at all, or would my pipe from my upstream 
 still be congested with garbage traffic ?

No. You cannot influence the inbound traffic apart from not advertising some of 
your prefixes to some of your neighbors or giving them hints with BGP 
communities or AS-path prepending. Whatever you do with BGP on your routers 
influences only the paths the outbound traffic is taking. What you'd actually 
need is remote-triggered black hole. Search the Nanog archives for RTBH, you'll 
find a number of links in a message from Frank Bulk sent a few days ago.

Hope this helps
Ivan
 
http://www.ioshints.info/about
http://blog.ioshints.info/





RE: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Ballard, Eric
We are seeing the same thing, has anyone found the offending AS yet?

Thanks
ERIC

-Original Message-
From: Adam Hebert [mailto:a2t...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 3:11 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

Multiple providers are seeing this right now.  I assume someone is
advertising an extremely long AS_PATH again?

anyone else seeing this?

Adam





Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread James Bensley
Throw your coffee at them!

Just my two pence ;)

...James

-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
  Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/U dpu s: a-- C++$ U+ L++ B- P+ E? W+++$ N K W++ O M++$ V-
PS+++ PE++ Y+ PGP t 5 X+ R- tv+ b+ DI D+++ G+ e(+) h--(++) r++ z++
--END GEEK CODE BLOCK--



Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread randal k
Yep, we started seeing this right around 12:20pm MST. We saw it from a
customer's rapidly-flapping BGP peer. We told them to configure bgp
maxas-limit, but apparently CRS1s don't have that command.

Anybody have a handy route-map that will deny anything with a as-path
longer than say 15-20? ;-)

Cheers,
Randal

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Adam Heberta2t...@gmail.com wrote:
 Multiple providers are seeing this right now.  I assume someone is
 advertising an extremely long AS_PATH again?

 anyone else seeing this?

 Adam




Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Joe Provo
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 03:37:07PM -0600, randal k wrote:
 Yep, we started seeing this right around 12:20pm MST. We saw it from a
 customer's rapidly-flapping BGP peer. We told them to configure bgp
 maxas-limit, but apparently CRS1s don't have that command.
 
 Anybody have a handy route-map that will deny anything with a as-path
 longer than say 15-20? ;-)
 
Been a while since I had to throw this on cisco, but I since it lacks
sane repeat constraint, you have to either choose to iterate over your
acceptable space or deny on the longer-than-acceptable. For the latter,
^[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_[0-9]+_([0-9]+_)+
clobbers 15 ASNs and longer.

-- 
 RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE



Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Jared Mauch


On Aug 17, 2009, at 5:37 PM, randal k wrote:


Yep, we started seeing this right around 12:20pm MST. We saw it from a
customer's rapidly-flapping BGP peer. We told them to configure bgp
maxas-limit, but apparently CRS1s don't have that command.

Anybody have a handy route-map that will deny anything with a as-path
longer than say 15-20? ;-)


Is there some significant barrier to people getting recent code on the  
devices that is not impacted by this and the other fun bgp 'attacks'  
that can happen?  We usually see customers drop bgp sessions all over,  
making me wonder ... if you're not able to upgrade, what is the  
issue?  Just that most people don't see these as an attack against  
their infrastructure?  That people are unwilling to upgrade code  
unless it has a long-term impact to their operations?  An outage once  
every few months is OK?


- Jared



Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread deleskie
I'd have to _assume_ that a lot of those impacted don't have a maint contract 
with their router vendor of choice and therefore don't have an easy path to 
upgrade.
-jim
--Original Message--
From: Jared Mauch
To: randal k
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?
Sent: Aug 17, 2009 7:40 PM


On Aug 17, 2009, at 5:37 PM, randal k wrote:

 Yep, we started seeing this right around 12:20pm MST. We saw it from a
 customer's rapidly-flapping BGP peer. We told them to configure bgp
 maxas-limit, but apparently CRS1s don't have that command.

 Anybody have a handy route-map that will deny anything with a as-path
 longer than say 15-20? ;-)

Is there some significant barrier to people getting recent code on the  
devices that is not impacted by this and the other fun bgp 'attacks'  
that can happen?  We usually see customers drop bgp sessions all over,  
making me wonder ... if you're not able to upgrade, what is the  
issue?  Just that most people don't see these as an attack against  
their infrastructure?  That people are unwilling to upgrade code  
unless it has a long-term impact to their operations?  An outage once  
every few months is OK?

- Jared



Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Jared Mauch


On Aug 17, 2009, at 6:45 PM, deles...@gmail.com wrote:

I'd have to _assume_ that a lot of those impacted don't have a maint  
contract with their router vendor of choice and therefore don't have  
an easy path to upgrade.

-jim


Cisco gives out free software upgrades for any security(PSIRT) issue.

Take the recent 4-byte asn crash advisory:

-- snip --
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/products_security_advisory09186a0080aea4c9.shtml

Customers should have their product serial number available and be  
prepared to give the URL of this notice as evidence of entitlement to  
a free upgrade. Free upgrades for non-contract customers must be  
requested through the TAC.


-- snip --

I would view this as an active attack against the internet  
infrastructure and be working with the PSIRT team if it impacted my  
network ...


- Jared




Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Ricky Beam
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:40:39 -0400, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net  
wrote:
Is there some significant barrier to people getting recent code on the  
devices that is not impacted by this and the other fun bgp 'attacks'  
that can happen?


In a word: YES.

Any respectable ISP will not load code that has not been extensively  
tested.  Failure to do so can, and WILL, lead to even greater impact  
outages. (we've all made that mistake.  Once.)  Unless you do millions  
with Cisco and can therefore get custom IOS builds, you won't get a newer  
version with *just* the intended bug fixed.  Their maint rebuilds end up  
with multiple fixes and all too often, previous fixes reverted. (I  
stopped counting the number of times I had to bitch at them to refix the  
SNMP DLCI interface counters on the 7401... we don't test frame relay on  
the 7401 -- sure, that's eons ago, but nothing has changed over there.)


And then there's the question of support... again, any respectable ISP  
maintains maint contracts with their vendors.  But, things tend to fall  
through the cracks... contracts expire, people forget to list all the  
equipment, vendors drop support for various hardware and software, etc.


You've obviously not gone to Cisco for any non-contract software  
updates.  It's faster to bribe someone with an active service contract or  
use google.


Also... Never underestimate the power of Lazy!

--Ricky



Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Paul Ferguson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com wrote:


 Any respectable ISP will not load code that has not been extensively
 tested.  [...]

Just an observation on how things have changed in ~15 years:

I recall Cisco code bugs that were fixed in semi- real-time, and quotes
from tli: Code still warm from compiler. Confidence level: Boots in lab.

:-)

- - ferg

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003)

wj8DBQFKifMaq1pz9mNUZTMRAkIVAKD/G3MTDXLx9QydkEQq4azQZW4VGwCgrI+t
y30sajrGH98vhOhcyyW0wm0=
=CzXf
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--
Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
Engineering Architecture for the Internet
fergdawgster(at)gmail.com
ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/



Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Marko Milivojevic
 Confidence level: Boots in lab.

One could argue that certain things haven't actually changed that much ;-).

Marko.

--
Marko
CCIE #18427 (SP)
My network blog: http://cisco.markom.info/



Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Brett Watson

On Aug 17, 2009, at 5:17 PM, Paul Ferguson wrote:

I recall Cisco code bugs that were fixed in semi- real-time, and  
quotes
from tli: Code still warm from compiler. Confidence level: Boots in  
lab.


IETF Dallas, 1995 I think. MCI Reston engg and Cisco (Ravi and others)  
in the terminal room cutting a new image of IS-IS for us because we'd  
tripped on the 24-day timer bug wherein all adjacencies would drop.  
Loaded on production routers that evening to fix the problem... good  
times :)


-b




Re: Anyone else seeing (invalid or corrupt AS path) 3 bytes E01100 ?

2009-08-17 Thread Kevin Oberman
 From: Brett Watson br...@the-watsons.org
 Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 19:11:06 -0700
 
 On Aug 17, 2009, at 5:17 PM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
 
  I recall Cisco code bugs that were fixed in semi- real-time, and  
  quotes
  from tli: Code still warm from compiler. Confidence level: Boots in  
  lab.
 
 IETF Dallas, 1995 I think. MCI Reston engg and Cisco (Ravi and others)  
 in the terminal room cutting a new image of IS-IS for us because we'd  
 tripped on the 24-day timer bug wherein all adjacencies would drop.  
 Loaded on production routers that evening to fix the problem... good  
 times :)

I remember back in 1993 or 1994 getting a note from Tony Li chastising
us for running BGP4 code that was over a WEEK old. How could we possibly
expect things to work with code that far out of date?

The amazing part is that BGP4 not only worked, but was very stable less
then a month later when NSFnet shut down an se had to go to BGP4 to peer
with everyone (like MCI, Sprint, NASA, and UUnet).

Yep, it booted in the lab, all right.
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: ober...@es.net  Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751