On Thu 22 Apr 2021 01:24:54 GMT, Job Snijders via NANOG wrote:
> One example is
> http://lg.ring.nlnog.net/prefix_detail/lg01/ipv6?q=2a0b:6b86:d15::/48
>
> 2a0b:6b86:d15::/48 via:
> BGP.as_path: 204092 57199 35280 6939 42615 42615 212232
> BGP.as_path: 208627 207910 57199
Job Snijders via NANOG writes:
> *RIGHT NOW* (at the moment of writing), there are a number of zombie
> route visible in the IPv6 Default-Free Zone:
[Reversing the order of your two examples]
> Another one is
> http://lg.ring.nlnog.net/prefix_detail/lg01/ipv6?q=2a0b:6b86:d24::/48
>
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:24:54AM +0200, Job Snijders via NANOG wrote:
[...]
>
> Another one is
> http://lg.ring.nlnog.net/prefix_detail/lg01/ipv6?q=2a0b:6b86:d24::/48
>
> 2a0b:6b86:d24::/48 via:
> BGP.as_path: 201701 9002 6939 42615 212232
> BGP.as_path: 34927 9002
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 02:29:31PM +0300, Alexandre Snarskii wrote:
> 9002. Hit by Juniper PR1562090, route stuck in DeletePending..
> Workaround applied, sessions with 6939 restarted, route is gone.
Thank you for the details and clearing the issue.
Kind regards,
Job
On 22/04/2021 02:24, Job Snijders via NANOG wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 09:22:57PM +, Jakob Heitz (jheitz) wrote:
I'd like to get some data on what actually happened in the real cases
and analyze it.
[snip]
TCP zero window is possible, but many other things could
cause it too.
to the problem.
-Original Message-
From: NANOG On
Behalf Of Job Snijders via NANOG
Sent: Thursday, 22 April 2021 9:25 AM
To: Jakob Heitz (jheitz)
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: BGP and The zero window edge
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 09:22:57PM +, Jakob Heitz (jheitz) wrote:
> I'd l
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 09:22:57PM +, Jakob Heitz (jheitz) wrote:
> I'd like to get some data on what actually happened in the real cases
> and analyze it.
>
> [snip]
>
> TCP zero window is possible, but many other things could
> cause it too.
Indeed. There could be a number of reasons that
Dnia Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 08:59:06PM +, Jakob Heitz (jheitz) via NANOG
napisał(a):
> Has anyone else seen this before or can provide data to analyze?
> On or off list.
- https://labs.ripe.net/author/romain_fontugne/bgp-zombies/
- https://www.slideshare.net/atendesoftware/bgp-zombie-routes
understanding of what actually happened.
TCP zero window is possible, but many other things could
cause it too.
Anyone?
Regards,
Jakob.
-Original Message-
From: Job Snijders
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2021 2:11 PM
To: Jakob Heitz (jheitz)
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: BGP and The zero
Dear Jakob, group,
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 08:59:06PM +, Jakob Heitz (jheitz) via NANOG wrote:
> Ben's blog details an experiment in which he advertises routes and then
> withdraws them, but some of them remain stuck for days.
>
> I'd like to get to the bottom of this problem.
I think there
Ben's blog details an experiment in which he advertises routes and then
withdraws them, but some of them remain stuck for days.
I'd like to get to the bottom of this problem.
Has anyone else seen this before or can provide data to analyze?
On or off list.
Regards,
Jakob.
-Original
Nice article explaining a specific BGP corner case not removing routes when
TCP window reaches 0.
https://blog.benjojo.co.uk/post/bgp-stuck-routes-tcp-zero-window
The proposed solution is a new RFC for BGP with the suggestion to introduce
a new timer.
Fascinating!
Jean St-Laurent /CISSP
12 matches
Mail list logo
