[c-nsp] 3/11 (invalid or corrupt AS path)

[M Usman Ashraf]

Hi List,

We have just experience the same problem on SRC but with a different reason,

%BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor X.X.X.X 3/11 (invalid or corrupt AS
path) 518 bytes 50020202 02009531 23012306 71B9BAFC BA

23w4d: BGP: X.X.X.X Bad attributes

Feb 16 21:26:04.918 pst: %BGP-4-MSGDUMP: unsupported or mal-formatted
message received from X.X.X.X:
FFFF FFFF FFFF FFFF FFFF FFFF FFFF FFFF 022C 0200 0002 1140 0101 0050 0202
0202
0095 3123 0123 0671 B9BA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA
FCBA
FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA
FCBA
FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA
FCBA
FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA
FCBA
FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA
FCBA
FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA FCBA
FCBA--

Any idea of reason? or what can be a bad message for BGP that can tear down
adjacency ?

Regards,

M Usman Ashraf



On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Rodney Dunn <rodunn at cisco.com> wrote:

> That would have to be *real* old code.
>
> That was fixed back in the 12.1(4)
>
> and 12.0(10)S3 days.
>
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 01:25:32PM -0500, Tim Donahue wrote:
> > Joe Provo wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 06:14:08PM +0100, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:
> > >> Ozar wrote:
> > >>> I am starting to see random BGP neighbor messages from multiple
> neighbors
> > >>> on
> > >>> different boxes.
> > >>>
> > >>> %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: received from neighbor X.X.X.X 3/11 (invalid or
> > >>> corrupt
> > >>> AS path) 516 bytes
> > > [snip]
> > >> No, it is not software error, it is extremly long as-path:
> > >
> > > The message itself, correct.  The flapping sessions observed on some
> > > code, the long path is indeed triggering some bug. It is immaterial
> > > if it is the revival of an ld bug or a new one, there are folks
> > > flapping over this (and related) paths.  Providers without some level
> > > of sanity filters (really need many-multiples the current diameter of
> > > the net?) should be shamed into limiting their customer's prepends.
> > >
> >
> > According to the NANOG thread on this, it would seem that the bug would
> > be CSCdr54230.
> >
> > Tim
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>