Re: Route optimization using GPUs?

[Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc>]

Ryan-

Unfortunately it doesn't appear that you have a solid understanding of core
BGP fundamentals.

I suggest starting with a read of RFC4271.

Have a great weekend and holiday season.


On Fri, Dec 6, 2024 at 1:19 PM Ryan Hamel <ryan () rkhtech org> wrote:

> Tom,
>
> The automotive industry has normalized "synthetic". It's motor oil that is
> artificially created, vs pulled out of the ground and refined. It's a
> perfect analogy for routes that were created by third-party software, vs
> organically created/redistributed from the proper AS.
>
> Ryan Hamel
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc>
> *Sent:* Friday, December 6, 2024 10:10 AM
> *To:* Ryan Hamel <ryan () rkhtech org>
> *Cc:* Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>; nanog () nanog org <nanog () nanog org>
> *Subject:* Re: Route optimization using GPUs?
>
> Caution: This is an external email and may be malicious. Please take care
> when clicking links or opening attachments.
>
> not properly prepending communities on synthetic routes
>
>
> Let's not normalize 'synthetic route' as a term. It's not a thing that
> exists.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2024 at 12:32 PM Ryan Hamel <ryan () rkhtech org> wrote:
>
> Nick,
>
> I understand there are rules and unspoken guidelines/rules for the DFZ,
> but when it comes to each individual AS, that org/operator can run their AS
> internally however they please, and maybe they have considered the risks
> you have mentioned.
>
> That said, I can argue that upstreams not filtering their customers
> properly removes a safety guard, upstreams not implementing RPKI removes a
> safety guard, not properly prepending communities on synthetic routes to
> drop them on export again removes a safety guard. I can go on...
>
>    - As an industry, we should be well beyond the point of having to tell
>    people that this is a poor idea, in the same way that we don't need to tell
>    people that bypassing electrical fuse boxes is a poor idea, or removing
>    railings on stair-cases, or not wearing motorbike helmets, or anything else
>    designed to mitigate the unfortunate consequences of entirely predictable
>    accidents.
>
> Where this statement falls short is, those are all regulated by building
> codes, laws, etc. No laws exist dictating how BGP, routing protocols in
> general, and topologies must be implemented, nor what safety guidelines
> must be adhered to.
>
> Ryan Hamel
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
> *Sent:* Friday, December 6, 2024 8:34 AM
> *To:* Ryan Hamel <ryan () rkhtech org>
> *Cc:* Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc>; nanog () nanog org <nanog () nanog org>
> *Subject:* Re: Route optimization using GPUs?
>
> Caution: This is an external email and may be malicious. Please take care
> when clicking links or opening attachments.
>
>
> Ryan Hamel wrote on 05/12/2024 23:45:
> > What does "these devices don't follow standard BGP behaviors" have to do
> > with adding a NO_EXPORT or specific community on the import policy when
> > a route is accepted, and being belt & suspenders with matching those
> > communities to drop those routes on export to carriers/IX/PNI sessions?
>
> Ryan,
>
> BGP ensures loop-free interdomain path computation by inspecting the AS
> path of each NLRI.  If a routing optimiser rewrites all the AS paths for
> all the NLRIs it receives, then it's just pooped all over the primary
> component of BGP that's designed to ensure that interdomain BGP actually
> works in the way that it's supposed to do in the first place, which also
> acts as an intrinsic safety guard against dfz hijacking.
>
> Removing an intrinsic safety guard like this is an inherently risky
> thing to do. When you elevate the inherent risk of a system, you
> necessarily elevate either the likelihood of failure or the consequences
> of a failure, or both.
>
> As an industry, we should be well beyond the point of having to tell
> people that this is a poor idea, in the same way that we don't need to
> tell people that bypassing electrical fuse boxes is a poor idea, or
> removing railings on stair-cases, or not wearing motorbike helmets, or
> anything else designed to mitigate the unfortunate consequences of
> entirely predictable accidents.
>
> Nick