Re: [GROW] Limiting AS path length?
Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 10:36:59PM +0200, Claudio Jeker: > > And what if I make it 675 ASes instead and watch sparks fly as a few > > hops away routers hit the 4096-byte BGP message size? > > > > Or I make it 700 ASes with only a 16-bit AS path or a truncated 32-bit > > AS path, so the first 32-bit router that tries to create a 700-hop > > 32-bit AS path exceeds 4096 bytes? > > You are applying a band-aid to a broken bone. There is many more ways you > can push an UPDATE to over 4096 bytes. Using AS path alone is probably the > least successful. There are many more transitive attributes that you can > use to bloat an update. So whatever limit you come up with will not > protect you from tripping over the message size limit. > > It would be great if there is a standards document properly describing > what to do in such a case because this is one of the underspecified corner > cases in the current spec. isnt this rfc7606 ___ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
Re: [GROW] Limiting AS path length?
+1 From: GROW On Behalf Of Job Snijders Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 2:37 PM To: Jared Mauch Cc: Iljitsch van Beijnum ; grow@ietf.org Subject: Re: [GROW] Limiting AS path length? Limiting the AS_PATH length - from an IETF RFC publication process in context of providing operational guidance, probably shouldn’t be “limit the path length to avoid vendor bugs”. Instead, the guidance perhaps should be “please report and fix bugs”, right? :-) Kind regards, Job ___ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
