North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: 4-Byte AS Number soon to come?
- From: Paul Jakma
- Date: Tue Aug 23 05:55:54 2005
The IDR draft is awaiting implementation report. There are apparently
two implementations, one with field deployment, which suffices to
move the draft forward. I happen to have one concern about the draft,
and I'd like to ask on NANOG to find out whether or not my concern is
of actual operational significance (ie significant enough to revise
the draft and start again on implementations):
How important is the operational use of BGP protocol analysers?
Is it common or uncommon to fire up 'ethereal' or 'tcpdump' to debug
a BGP problem?
Would it be problematic to have to either a) clear sessions for your
analyser to fully understand the BGP stream or b) tell your analyser
whether the flow uses 2 or 4 byte ASNs?
Do you ever have an operational need to watch several BGP flows at
the same time?
Are there any other operational uses for tools which *passively* read
BGP besides debug? Eg, passive gathering of BGP data, a 'BGP IDS'?
Are these used at all?
Essentially, this draft as it stands is going to make it difficult to
observe and comprehend BGP AS_PATH without either human intervention
or restart of the session(s) concerned. A guage how much of a problem
this would be in real-life (if any problem at all?) would be useful
in determining whether it's worth lobbying to change the draft.
Paul Jakma email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Piece of cake!
-- G.S. Koblas