Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Anyone notice strange announcements for 174.128.31.0/24
From: David Barak <thegameiam () yahoo com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:11:54 -0800 (PST)


--- On Tue, 1/13/09, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick () ianai net> wrote:
AS_PATH != identity, and I would not recommend loading
the latter onto the former.

We disagree.  When I am researching something, I frequently
look at ASNs in the path to figure out not just where but
who controls the path.

Oh, I certainly think that there is a loose coupling there, and the relationship is highly valuable from a 
troubleshooting point of view.  However, I would counsel anyone investigating AS_Path relationships to remember that do 
not completely characterize the relationship between any two organizations, let alone the multipolar relationships 
between all organizations.  

It's a good first-cut, but it doesn't have the level of authority that you're implying.  I'm not aware of any ASNs 
being trademarked...


   Personally, I would be upset if someone injected
a route
with my ASN in the AS_PATH without my permission.

Why?  Is this a theoretical "because it's
ugly" complaint, or is there a reason why manipulating
this particular BGP attribute in this particular way is so
bad?  Organizations do filtering and routing manipulation
all over the place.  Is there something worse about doing it
this way than others?

Filtering and other manipulation happened on your router,
prepending my ASN is putting that information into every
router.  That seems to be a serious qualitative difference
to me.  Do you disagree?

This is qualitatively similar to an ASN announcing de-aggregated routes - it may be nice if they don't, and you don't 
have to accept them, but are they permitted?



This thread has been interesting & educational.  So
many people seem to be happy to explain why they should be
allowed to use globally unique identifiers they do not own
in ways which were not intended, then explain to the people
who do own those identifiers how they should react, which
alarms should go off, and even which priority the alarms
should have.

As I have repeated probably hundreds of times: Your
network, your decision.  I have yet to hear a credible
argument against that stance.  What you do _inside_ your
network is _your_ decision.  When it leaves your network,
however, things change.

Exactly!  Provider RB announces $WEIRD.  A bunch of providers receive alarms about the existence of $WEIRD, and they 
treated this as $IMPORTANT.  The bunch of providers who treated this as $IMPORTANT are informing all of us about their 
monitoring thresholds and their responses to this threshold being met.  Their networks, their decisions.

It should be pointed out that pre-provisioned AS_Path filters and prefix-lists would actually be effective at defeating 
this and preventing someone who is actually malicious from using this technique.  This is an excellent argument for 
implementing SIDR...



Announcing an ASN which is not yours to eBGP peers means it
is leaving your network, which means it is not just your
business.  Doing so and then telling the ASN owner that they
should not worry about it afterwards - and in fact arguing
when the owner repeatedly tells you this caused them
problems - does not seem to be the proper course of action.

Understood, but if this is viewed as problematic, there is a very simple solution: don't allow a BGP customer (or 
peer!) to prepend someone else's ASN.



I mentioned earlier in the thread if Cogent prepending
Sprint's ASN to Verio, people would react differently. 
Randy said tools can be used for good or bad, obviously
implying he's the good guy.  He is not the good guy.  He
used someone else's resources without their permission
and without even notifying them, costing them time &
effort.  Randy doesn't get to decide if the ASN owner
should have alerted or investigated  or whatever, and
neither do any of you unless it is your ASN.

How can anyone seriously argue the ASN owner is somehow
wrong and keep a straight face?  How can anyone else who
actually runs a network not see that as ridiculous?

Are any providers going to implement ^ASN filtering as a result of this experiment?  This could turn out to be a very 
inexpensive lesson, which is far preferable to more expensive lessons...


David Barak
Need Geek Rock?  Try The Franchise: 
http://www.listentothefranchise.com


      


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]