[rbak-nsp] today's BGP issue...

[Marcin Kuczera]

David Freedman wrote:
> Let us not forget 
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shakir-idr-ops-reqs-for-bgp-error-handling-01

I have never read this draft before, but this is exactly what I ment:
    o  It is unacceptable within modern deployments of the BGP-4 protocol
       that a single erroneous UPDATE packet affects prefixes that it
       does not carry.  This requirement therefore requires some
       modification to the means by which erroneous UPDATE packets are
       handled, and reacted to - with a particular focus on avoiding the
       use of the NOTIFICATION message.

Marcin


> 
> also.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* redback-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net 
> [redback-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] on behalf of Jeff Tantsura 
> [jeff.nsp at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 01 December 2011 22:36
> *To:* Marcin Kuczera
> *Cc:* redback-nsp at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [rbak-nsp] today's BGP issue...
> 
> Marcin,
>  
> Why don't you read RFC4271, the only method to notify a peer about error 
> condition is to send a Notification and reset the session.
> 
> 
>     1. Introduction
> 
> 
> 
>    According to the base BGP specification [RFC4271 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4271>], a BGP speaker that
>    receives an UPDATE message containing a malformed attribute is
>    required to reset the session over which the offending attribute was
>    received
> 
>  
> 
> There is a recent development, namely 
>  draft-ietf-idr-optional-transitive to address this issue, however it is 
> still a draft, not a normative document to follow/implement.
> You might also want to read draft-ietf-idr-as0-00, there's a reason for 
> it and just for your understanding for a personal draft to become a 
> working group document, there must be ratehr great support for it.
>  
> Why don't you call names vendors which allow to to set AGGREGATOR to 0 
> in first place :)?
>  
> Regards,
> Jeff
> 
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Marcin Kuczera <marcin at leon.pl 
> <mailto:marcin at leon.pl>> wrote:
> 
>     as here:
>     http://www.gossamer-threads.__com/lists/nanog/users/147149
>     <http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/nanog/users/147149>
> 
>     please please please, what kind of an IDOT is working @ /// and
>     decided to code closing session in faulty attributes instead of
>     ignore and log action ?
>     I just can't understand it, that person probably had never ever
>     worked at living, public BGP network..
> 
>     This is continuation of Aggregator problem started in early 6.3 line
>     (LI)...
>     They resolved my issue, but still left some sanity check with action
>     CLOSE SESSION.
>     I hope that after today that person will look for a new job...
> 
>     Regards,
>     Marcin
>     _________________________________________________
>     redback-nsp mailing list
>     redback-nsp at puck.nether.net <mailto:redback-nsp at puck.nether.net>
>     https://puck.nether.net/__mailman/listinfo/redback-nsp
>     <https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/redback-nsp>
> 
>