It is worth noting that this PSN was also given as the root cause for an outage seen by several LINX members on 29th July (linx-ops thread "Anyone see any issues at 0700ish?") so there was already evidence of this being seen in the wild due as a result of normal activity.
The "it will never happen" argument is even less compelling when it becomes "it will never happen again"... -- Russell Heilling IP Architect Interoute Communications Ltd +44 (0)20 7025 9304 (direct) +44 (0)7970 818258 (mobile) [email protected] >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] [mailto:uknof- >[email protected]] On Behalf Of Thomas Mangin >Sent: 08 November 2011 10:24 >To: Tom Hill >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [uknof] Widespread JunOS BGP issues today? > >Hi Tom, > >I agree the wording was clearly not ideal but we are speaking of BGP, a >protocol open to the world. The PR indicate that there is no known work >around, so I can not see how someone could have thought "it will never >happen", after the RIPE 63 experiment. Clearly not all backbone felt the >pain, so it would look like that most of them upgraded. > >To me, the sentence implies "within normal operations". It seems that >the issue was caused by a deliberate attack. > >I know there is similar bug on older version of JunOS for M7i with >FlowSpec routes which crash rpd as I triggered it when developing >exabgp. It may even still be there :p However the likeliness of this bug >affecting networks is as well "exceedingly unlikely to occur" :D > >Thomas > >On 8 Nov 2011, at 09:51, Tom Hill wrote: > >> On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 09:06 +0000, Neil J. McRae wrote: >>> This is not a new issue. Juniper issued an advisory for it back in >>> August. >> >> You can imagine why no-one jumped to upgrade, however: >> >> "MPCs (Modular Port Concentrators) installed in an MX Series router >may >> crash upon receipt of very specific and unlikely route prefix >> install/delete actions, such as a BGP routing update. The set of route >> prefix updates is non-deterministic and **exceedingly unlikely to >> occur.**" >> >> (Emphasis mine) >> >> Tom >>> >> >> >> > >
