Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Stephen Satchell
On 1/8/19 9:31 AM, Töma Gavrichenkov wrote: > 8 Jan. 2019 г., 20:19 : >> In the real world, doing the correct thing > > — such as writing RFC compliant code — > >> is often harder than doing >> an incorrect thing, yes. > > Evidently, yes. I "grew up" during the early days of PPP. As a member

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Randy Bush
> We plan to resume the experiments January 16th (next Wednesday), and > have updated the experiment schedule [A] accordingly. As always, we > welcome your feedback. i did not realize that frr updates propagated so quickly. very cool. randy

RE: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread adamv0025
> Steve Noble > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 6:42 PM > > There is no such thing as a fully RFC compliant BGP : > Which RFC do you mean 6286, 6608, 6793, 7606, 7607, 7705 or 8212 when you say fully RFC compliant BGP please? >

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Steve Noble
There is no such thing as a fully RFC compliant BGP : https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/reference/standards/bgp.html does not list 7606 Cisco Bug: CSCvf06327 - Error Handling for RFC 7606 not implemented for NXOS This is as of today and a 2 second google search..

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Job Snijders
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 9:55 Randy Bush wrote: > >>> We plan to resume the experiments January 16th (next Wednesday), and > >>> have updated the experiment schedule [A] accordingly. As always, we > >>> welcome your feedback. > >> i did not realize that frr updates propagated so quickly. very

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Randy Bush
>>> We plan to resume the experiments January 16th (next Wednesday), and >>> have updated the experiment schedule [A] accordingly. As always, we >>> welcome your feedback. >> i did not realize that frr updates propagated so quickly. very cool. > > FRR is undergoing a fairly rapid pace of

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Eric Kuhnke
FRR is undergoing a fairly rapid pace of development, thanks to the cloud-scale operators and hosting providers which are using it in production. https://cumulusnetworks.com/blog/welcoming-frrouting-to-the-linux-foundation/ On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:55 AM Randy Bush wrote: > > We plan to

RE: Changing upstream providers, opinions/thoughts on 123.net and cogent

2019-01-08 Thread Aaron Gould
I’ve never heard of 123 I’ve used Cogent for several years now… Price was good 10 gig link… for a few years 20 gig (2) 10 gigs lagged… for a year or so… 100 gig link for past few months… The support is quick and easy to deal with. DDOS RTBH is nice quick and easy (but different

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Tom Ammon
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019, 11:50 AM * cu...@dcc.ufmg.br (Italo Cunha) [Tue 08 Jan 2019, 17:42 CET]: > >[A] https://goo.gl/nJhmx1 > > For the archives, since goo.gl will cease to exist soon, this links to > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1U42-HCi3RzXkqVxd8e2yLdK9okFZl77tWZv13EsEzO0/htmlview >

Re: Report on Legal Barriers to RPKI Adoption

2019-01-08 Thread Nathalie Trenaman
Dear all, After reading the report, I agree with Job it was well written and a must-read for everyone with an interest in RPKI, even outside the ARIN region. Well done! As RIPE NCC is maintaining validator software, I would like to comment on point 2: > 2. Developers of RPKI validation

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Italo Cunha
Hi Niels, we did run the experiment in a controlled environment with different versions of Cisco, BIRD, and Quagga routers and observed no issues. We did add FRR to the test suite yesterday for future tests. On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:49 AM wrote: > > * cu...@dcc.ufmg.br (Italo Cunha) [Tue 08

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Saku Ytti
Hey, > After seeing this initial result I'm wondering why the researchers > couldn't set up their own sandbox first before breaking code on the > internet. I believe FRR is a free download and comes with GNU autoconf. We probably should avoid anything which might demotivate future good guys

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread valdis . kletnieks
On Tue, 08 Jan 2019 17:48:46 +0100, niels=na...@bakker.net said: > After seeing this initial result I'm wondering why the researchers > couldn't set up their own sandbox first before breaking code on the > internet. I believe FRR is a free download and comes with GNU autoconf. Perhaps you'd

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Nick Hilliard
niels=na...@bakker.net wrote on 08/01/2019 16:48: After seeing this initial result I'm wondering why the researchers couldn't set up their own sandbox first before breaking code on the internet.  I believe FRR is a free download and comes with GNU autoconf. the researchers didn't break code -

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread niels=nanog
* thomasam...@gmail.com (Tom Ammon) [Tue 08 Jan 2019, 17:59 CET]: There are a fair number of open source BGP implementations now. It would require additional effort to test all of them. In the real world, doing the correct thing is often harder than doing an incorrect thing, yes.

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread niels=nanog
* valdis.kletni...@vt.edu (valdis.kletni...@vt.edu) [Tue 08 Jan 2019, 18:06 CET]: (Personally, I'd never heard of FRR before) Martin Winter of OSR/FRR has attended many a NANOG, RIPE and other industry meetings, so it's not for their lack of trying -- Niels.

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Job Snijders
OOn Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 19:59 Tom Ammon wrote: > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019, 11:50 AM >> * cu...@dcc.ufmg.br (Italo Cunha) [Tue 08 Jan 2019, 17:42 CET]: >> >[A] https://goo.gl/nJhmx1 >> >> For the archives, since goo.gl will cease to exist soon, this links to >> >>

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Jared Mauch
> On Jan 8, 2019, at 12:06 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > > On Tue, 08 Jan 2019 17:48:46 +0100, niels=na...@bakker.net said: > >> After seeing this initial result I'm wondering why the researchers >> couldn't set up their own sandbox first before breaking code on the >> internet. I

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Tore Anderson
* Job Snijders > Given the severity of the bug, there is a strong incentive for people to > upgrade ASAP. The buggy code path can also be disabled without upgrading, by building FRR with the --disable-bgp-vnc configure option, as I understand it. I've been told that this is the default in

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread niels=nanog
Hi Saku, After seeing this initial result I'm wondering why the researchers couldn't set up their own sandbox first before breaking code on the internet. I believe FRR is a free download and comes with GNU autoconf. We probably should avoid anything which might demotivate future good guys

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Jared Mauch
> On Jan 8, 2019, at 12:10 PM, niels=na...@bakker.net wrote: > > * thomasam...@gmail.com (Tom Ammon) [Tue 08 Jan 2019, 17:59 CET]: >> There are a fair number of open source BGP implementations now. It would >> require additional effort to test all of them. > > In the real world, doing the

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Töma Gavrichenkov
8 Jan. 2019 г., 20:19 : > In the real world, doing the correct thing — such as writing RFC compliant code — > is often harder than doing > an incorrect thing, yes. Evidently, yes. >

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread Italo Cunha
NANOG, We've performed the first announcement in this experiment yesterday, and, despite the announcement being compliant with BGP standards, FRR routers reset their sessions upon receiving it. Upon notice of the problem, we halted the experiments. The FRR developers confirmed that this issue

Re: BGP Experiment

2019-01-08 Thread niels=nanog
* cu...@dcc.ufmg.br (Italo Cunha) [Tue 08 Jan 2019, 17:42 CET]: [A] https://goo.gl/nJhmx1 For the archives, since goo.gl will cease to exist soon, this links to https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1U42-HCi3RzXkqVxd8e2yLdK9okFZl77tWZv13EsEzO0/htmlview After seeing this initial result I'm