Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-30 Thread joel jaeggli
On 11/24/14 8:58 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
 On 11/23/2014 11:20 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
 Their grasp of load-balancing seems a
 bit shallow also.
 
 
 Are there discussion/guidance papers that one can point to, to improve
 the depth of understanding, or at least get better configuration
 choices?  (Those are independent points of improvement...)

Bassim Halabi's book is getting a bit long in the tooth, but it was my
jumping-off point for my own forays into this space.

http://www.amazon.com/Internet-Routing-Architectures-2nd-Halabi/dp/157870233X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8qid=1417390786sr=8-1keywords=halabi+routing

The nanog tutorials have been assiduous about updating the bgp materials

https://www.nanog.org/resources/tutorials

So there are several iterations of the practical materials.

joel

 d/
 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


RE: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-24 Thread Curtis L. Parish
Thanks to everyone for your input on our less than desirable BGP situation. 

I do want to make sure I add that the state network we are a part of serves 
everything from elementary schools, to universities.  to the traffic cameras on 
the interstate.Many of these are in rural locations and in the past each 
state entity had created their own network including two separate state 
university networks.The state vendor managed network was created to save 
money and provide higher level services than just an ISP.   Among other things 
it serves as the private WAN for some state agencies.As our internet 
redundancy and bandwidth demands have increased we have outgrown the need for 
the high touch services offered by the state network but we must participate in 
order to maintain WAN access to other state universities.   

Thanks again for the feedback.

Curtis


Curtis Parish
Senior Network Engineer
Middle Tennessee State University 



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of joel jaeggli
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2014 1:21 PM
To: mark.ti...@seacom.mu; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

On 11/21/14 1:07 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
 On Friday, November 21, 2014 12:00:47 AM Curtis L. Parish
 wrote:
 
 We have recently added a second ISP  (third if you count I2).  Our 
 first ISP is actually a private state network that peers with two 
 Tier 1 providers.  We own an AS number and our IP space but at the 
 last minute learned our state network is advertising our network 
 using two different ASNs (neither ours) so they can load
 balance their connections.If you hit the right
 looking glass server you can see our network advertised
 by three different ASNs.We were told by the new ISP
 that this is a problem but the state network says it is not.

 Looking for opinions and words of wisdom on this split advertising 
 issue.
 
 Why aren't you originating your own prefixes and ASN by yourselves, 
 since you own both?

The practical problem here is that the control of prefix origination is 
distributed. so if there is a need to withdraw it from the state network or 
advertise it no export for some reason (e.g. performance problem maintenance 
etc) you likely can't. Their grasp of load-balancing seems a bit shallow also.

 Mark.
 




Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-24 Thread Dave Crocker
On 11/23/2014 11:20 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
 Their grasp of load-balancing seems a
 bit shallow also.


Are there discussion/guidance papers that one can point to, to improve
the depth of understanding, or at least get better configuration
choices?  (Those are independent points of improvement...)

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-23 Thread joel jaeggli
On 11/21/14 1:07 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
 On Friday, November 21, 2014 12:00:47 AM Curtis L. Parish 
 wrote:
 
 We have recently added a second ISP  (third if you count
 I2).  Our first ISP is actually a private state
 network that peers with two Tier 1 providers.  We own an
 AS number and our IP space but at the last minute
 learned our state network is advertising our network
 using two different ASNs (neither ours) so they can load
 balance their connections.If you hit the right
 looking glass server you can see our network advertised
 by three different ASNs.We were told by the new ISP
 that this is a problem but the state network says it is
 not.

 Looking for opinions and words of wisdom on this split
 advertising issue.
 
 Why aren't you originating your own prefixes and ASN by 
 yourselves, since you own both?

The practical problem here is that the control of prefix origination is
distributed. so if there is a need to withdraw it from the state network
or advertise it no export for some reason (e.g. performance problem
maintenance etc) you likely can't. Their grasp of load-balancing seems a
bit shallow also.

 Mark.
 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-23 Thread William Herrin
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Curtis L. Parish curtis.par...@mtsu.edu
wrote:
 We advertise our ASN into the state network with more specific routes
 that we advertise via ISP2 via our ASN.This is done because the
 state (vendor managed) network runs stateful firewalls and we have
 to force other multi-home entities on the state network to use our
 state connection instead of ISP2.   Our network has been removed
 from the state firewall due to previous problems with asymmetric
 routing with our I2 circuit.

Hi Curtis,

As you've already noted, the presence of a stateful firewall beyond your
BGP border is inimical to BGP multihoming. Traffic between two multihomed
networks must never cross a stateful firewall that is outside both
networks' borders. Practically speaking, there will asymmetry, path
flapping, per-packet load balancing and other quirks at locations outside
your control. The Internet DFZ is a chaotic system. Over time you won't be
able to make the packets reliably transit the firewall.

It sounds like this is a learning experience for both you and the folks at
the state network. If you have a friendly relationship with them, now would
be a good time to visit and talk about what are likely to be significant
changes to their network architecture to make multihomed users feasible.
Preferably with a the help of a local consultant who has BGP expertise.

If that doesn't sound like it would be a productive conversation then I
suggest you consider three different options:

1. Return to the state network alone,

2. Replace your state network connection with another commercial ISP,

3. Add an additional commercial ISP for the sake of your Internet access
needs, drop the BGP advertisements with the state network and then
implement resources which should only transit the state network using IP
addresses assigned by the state network rather than your BGP addresses.



 Here is a question.   I know that having one network advertised by
multiple ASNs
 is unconventional and thus it will probably be harder to get help
troubleshooting
 routing problems when they arise.Do you see a situation where our
network
 might be caught in a loop or black hole due to asymmetric routing and
conflicting advertisements?

Yes. And frequently. You have this thing balanced on the head of a pin.

Regards,
Bill Herrin




--
William Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems . Web: http://www.dirtside.com/
May I solve your unusual networking challenges?


Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-23 Thread Jimmy Hess
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Curtis L. Parish
curtis.par...@mtsu.edu wrote:
 I believe the state will modify their advertisements to add our ASN to the 
 path
 but changes to advertising via the state network has to go through a design
 and change management process and then be scheduled into maintenance
 windows.Any attempts to balance the traffic via prepending will take 
 weeks.
[snip]
In other words, you are in effect not in control of the advertisement
of your prefix,
therefore you practically don't actually have an autonomous system,
you have the number technically, but not the administrative division
that is intended to exist.

An appropriate amount of time to push out any change needed to an
announcement should be  no more than 1 business day,  but less than 2
hours in an emergency, to add extra impending or pull an announcement.
   I would call a change management process that requires any longer
unacceptable,  or  not reflecting the reality of the importance  of
well-maintained optimal properly functioning network connectivity.


You have what seems to be something very fragile,  and you have very
low configuration agility,  since you cannot change your announcements
as needed out through the state as you need them to.

A stateful firewall, has no correct place outside the border of a
multihomed network; by definition, to have a stateful firewall,  there
must be a single point of failure (on the stateful firewall element)
at least for each unique load-balancing tuple.

So I would call  (in this case),  the origination of your prefix by
multiple ASes a bad thing.
The protocol allows this,  but the other constraints related to the
situation are serious impediments  that make the solidity multihoming
seem improper or potentially precarious, in terms of the true
originating AS'  ability to function as an AS and manage their network

--
-JH


Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-23 Thread Jason Bothe
Agreed.  You could still recieve their routes and no/export your as but I 
wouldn't go beyond the firewall.  

Jason Bothe, Manager of Networking
Rice University

o   +1 713 348 5500
m  +1 713 703 3552
ja...@rice.edu

 On Nov 23, 2014, at 17:57, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
 
 On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Curtis L. Parish curtis.par...@mtsu.edu
 wrote:
 We advertise our ASN into the state network with more specific routes
 that we advertise via ISP2 via our ASN.This is done because the
 state (vendor managed) network runs stateful firewalls and we have
 to force other multi-home entities on the state network to use our
 state connection instead of ISP2.   Our network has been removed
 from the state firewall due to previous problems with asymmetric
 routing with our I2 circuit.
 
 Hi Curtis,
 
 As you've already noted, the presence of a stateful firewall beyond your
 BGP border is inimical to BGP multihoming. Traffic between two multihomed
 networks must never cross a stateful firewall that is outside both
 networks' borders. Practically speaking, there will asymmetry, path
 flapping, per-packet load balancing and other quirks at locations outside
 your control. The Internet DFZ is a chaotic system. Over time you won't be
 able to make the packets reliably transit the firewall.
 
 It sounds like this is a learning experience for both you and the folks at
 the state network. If you have a friendly relationship with them, now would
 be a good time to visit and talk about what are likely to be significant
 changes to their network architecture to make multihomed users feasible.
 Preferably with a the help of a local consultant who has BGP expertise.
 
 If that doesn't sound like it would be a productive conversation then I
 suggest you consider three different options:
 
 1. Return to the state network alone,
 
 2. Replace your state network connection with another commercial ISP,
 
 3. Add an additional commercial ISP for the sake of your Internet access
 needs, drop the BGP advertisements with the state network and then
 implement resources which should only transit the state network using IP
 addresses assigned by the state network rather than your BGP addresses.
 
 
 
 Here is a question.   I know that having one network advertised by
 multiple ASNs
 is unconventional and thus it will probably be harder to get help
 troubleshooting
 routing problems when they arise.Do you see a situation where our
 network
 might be caught in a loop or black hole due to asymmetric routing and
 conflicting advertisements?
 
 Yes. And frequently. You have this thing balanced on the head of a pin.
 
 Regards,
 Bill Herrin
 
 
 
 
 --
 William Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
 Owner, Dirtside Systems . Web: http://www.dirtside.com/
 May I solve your unusual networking challenges?
 


Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-21 Thread Mark Tinka
On Friday, November 21, 2014 12:00:47 AM Curtis L. Parish 
wrote:

 We have recently added a second ISP  (third if you count
 I2).  Our first ISP is actually a private state
 network that peers with two Tier 1 providers.  We own an
 AS number and our IP space but at the last minute
 learned our state network is advertising our network
 using two different ASNs (neither ours) so they can load
 balance their connections.If you hit the right
 looking glass server you can see our network advertised
 by three different ASNs.We were told by the new ISP
 that this is a problem but the state network says it is
 not.
 
 Looking for opinions and words of wisdom on this split
 advertising issue.

Why aren't you originating your own prefixes and ASN by 
yourselves, since you own both?

Mark.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-21 Thread William Waites
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 11:07:49 +0200, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu said:

  We own an AS number and our IP space but at the last minute
 learned our state network is advertising our network using two
 different ASNs (neither ours)

This will work, as in the BGP path selection algorithm will work as
designed in this situation. But it also means that the routing policy
is out of your control which is kind of the point of having an ASN! It
also makes it harder to track down who is operationally responsible
for that address space since it appears to the outside world to be in
two (or three! different places). I'd say don't do this unless you
really have no choice.

 Why aren't you originating your own prefixes and ASN by
 yourselves, since you own both?

Good question.

We (AS60241) almost ended up doing similarly for a while. Because of a
close association with the universities in Scotland, we discussed the
possibility of transit via JANET. This turned out to be difficult
because they run a whole bunch of private ASNs internally -- unlike in
North America where universities typically have their own real one. So
it would have been us - private stuff - AS786 and for some reason
that I forget they were unable to remove private ASNs from the
path. The best that might have been possible would be to have had them
announce our networks with synchronisation on, which would have meant
the outside world would have seen them originating in both AS786 and
AS60241. Icky. We (mutually) decided against this.

Just to say that there are strange, but not completely unreasonable
circumstances in which this can happen...

-w


pgpohqpKewJg4.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-21 Thread William Herrin
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Curtis L. Parish curtis.par...@mtsu.edu
wrote:
 We have recently added a second ISP  (third if you count I2).
 Our first ISP is actually a private state network that peers with
 two Tier 1 providers.  We own an AS number and our IP space
 but at the last minute learned our state network is advertising
 our network using two different ASNs (neither ours) so they can
 load balance their connections.If you hit the right looking glass
 server you can see our network advertised by three different
 ASNs.We were told by the new ISP that this is a problem but
 the state network says it is not.

Howdy,

If you drop your connection to the state network, do the routes with their
AS numbers drop out of the looking glasses? If not, then there's a problem.

If you depreference your connection to the state network by prepending your
AS number, do comparable prepends appear at the looking glasses or does the
state network continue to give its advertisement of your address space top
billing? If the state network's behavior strips your ability to load
balance your network then there's a problem.

Conventionally, the state network should be adding its AS number after
yours, not stripping your AS number. More often than not, this convention
is also the technically correct course of action.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
William Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems . Web: http://www.dirtside.com/
May I solve your unusual networking challenges?


RE: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-21 Thread Curtis L. Parish
Thanks for all the responses.  I will answer a few questions that have come on 
and off list.   (Sorry for length)

We advertise our ASN into the state network with more specific routes that we 
advertise via ISP2 via our ASN.This is done because the state (vendor 
managed) network runs stateful firewalls and we have to force other multi-home 
entities on the state network to use our state connection instead of ISP2.   
Our network has been removed from the state firewall due to previous problems 
with asymmetric routing with our I2 circuit.I am told the state network 
does drop our network from their advertisements when our network is 
unreachable.  That has not been explained or tested.

What we did not realize until about a week before turning up ISP2 was the state 
was consolidating all state networks to use two of the vendor’s ASNs when it 
peers with their two ISPs.  Our ASN is not part of the path.We had no 
choice but to turn up ISP2 due to bandwidth reasons. Miraculously we 
achieved almost a 50/50 balance of traffic.Bandwidth will be increased on 
ISP2 as demand grows so we will need the ability to prepend on the state 
network to make ISP2 look more desirable.

I believe the state will modify their advertisements to add our ASN to the path 
but changes to advertising via the state network has to go through a design and 
change management process and then be scheduled into maintenance windows.
Any attempts to balance the traffic via prepending will take weeks.As long 
as the traffic stays balanced we are OK.When replaying BGP route changes I 
normally see our network only advertised out one of state ASNs but occasionally 
I see it with two so traffic balance may be impacted depending on which ISP the 
state is egressing.


Here is a question.   I know that having one network advertised by multiple 
ASNs is unconventional and thus it will probably be harder to get help 
troubleshooting routing problems when they arise.Do you see a situation 
where our network might be caught in a loop or black hole due to asymmetric 
routing and conflicting advertisements?

Thanks again. New to the list but have already learned much by reading the 
archives.

Curtis


Curtis Parish
Senior Network Engineer
Middle Tennessee State University





Subject: Re: Multi-homing with multiple ASNs
Howdy,
If you drop your connection to the state network, do the routes with their AS 
numbers drop out of the looking glasses? If not, then there's a problem.
If you depreference your connection to the state network by prepending your AS 
number, do comparable prepends appear at the looking glasses or does the state 
network continue to give its advertisement of your address space top billing? 
If the state network's behavior strips your ability to load balance your 
network then there's a problem.
Conventionally, the state network should be adding its AS number after yours, 
not stripping your AS number. More often than not, this convention is also the 
technically correct course of action.



Multi-homing with multiple ASNs

2014-11-20 Thread Curtis L. Parish
Greetings,

We have recently added a second ISP  (third if you count I2).  Our first ISP 
is actually a private state network that peers with two Tier 1 providers.  We 
own an AS number and our IP space but at the last minute learned our state 
network is advertising our network using two different ASNs (neither ours) so 
they can load balance their connections.If you hit the right looking glass 
server you can see our network advertised by three different ASNs.We were 
told by the new ISP that this is a problem but the state network says it is not.

Looking for opinions and words of wisdom on this split advertising issue.

Thanks
curtis


Curtis Parish
Senior Network Engineer
Middle Tennessee State University