All of the same tragedy can happen without BGP optimizers, and does. 

BGP optimizers only harm the global Internet when route filters don't do their 
job. (Un)Fortunately, many other things also harm the global Internet when 
route filters don't do their job. Things other than BGP optimizers harm the 
global Internet more frequently via the same vector (lack of proper route 
filters). 




A given set of bugs are unlikely to affect both Optimizer edge egress filters 
and upstream ingress filters. If so, the Internet as a whole has much graver 
things to worry about. 





----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Job Snijders" <j...@instituut.net> 
To: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> 
Cc: "Töma Gavrichenkov" <xima...@gmail.com>, "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 12:41:13 PM 
Subject: Re: Performance metrics used in commercial BGP route optimizers 



On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 3:33 PM Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: 





More like do whatever you want in your own house as long as you don't infringe 
upon others. 




That's where the rub is; when using "BGP optimisers" to influence public 
Internet routing, you cannot guarantee you won't infringe upon others. 

<blockquote>



The argument against route optimizers (assuming appropriate ingress\egress 
filters) is a religious one and should be treated as such. 
</blockquote>



The argument against "BGP optimizers" is that we *cannot* assume appropriate 
ingress or egress filters. It appears to me like fallacy to suggest a line of 
reasoning ala "if you do things correctly, things won't go wrong". Clearly 
we've observed many times over that things *do* go wrong. 


Some examples: almost every year one of the major BGP vendors has a serious bug 
related to the functionality to NO_EXPORT in some release. Also, routinely we 
observe there are software defects that cause a device to behave different 
(read 'leak') than how the operator had explicitly configured the device. These 
are facts, not religious statements. 


Perhaps in a bug-free world there is room for dangerous activities, but there 
is no such thing as bug-free. And I haven't even covered the human error angle. 
We must robustly architect our networks to mitigate or dampen the negative 
effects of issues at all layers of the stack. 


I consider it wholly inappropriate to write-off the countless hours spend 
dealing with fallout from "BGP optimizers" and the significant financial 
damages we've sustained as "religious arguments". 


Kind regards, 

Job 

Reply via email to