nanog mailing list archives

Re: Operational feedback on policy redundancy


From: Saku Ytti via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2026 12:27:03 +0300

I'm skeptical of the data. What do you exactly mean?

This list largely deals with stateless IP routers, and I am assuming
this context.

What are the 'operational intents' you refer to? Are they ACL rules,
BGP policies? Because in either context, I don't believe 95% to be
redundant for a moment, so I must be confused and you're talking about
something entirely different.

You're not going to receive any input, because no one knows what you're asking.

On Fri, 3 Apr 2026 at 22:48, manwar--- via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:

Hello,

I am a PhD student currently looking at the long-term management of network policies and intents. In studying a 
large-scale production dataset from a service provider, I found that over 95% of the operational intents were 
semantically redundant (meaning they were completely shadowed or subsumed by broader, older rules).

I am trying to understand if this high level of policy bloat matches the actual experience of operators in the field:

Redundancy: Is cleaning up shadowed or redundant rules a regular part of your workflow, or do they just tend to stay 
in the system for years once they're active?
Conflicts: How often do you run into cases where multiple goals (which all seem fine on their own) accidentally 
create a conflict when they are enforced together over the same traffic?
Resolutions: Is there a standard way you "relax" or prioritize these goals when you find they are fighting each other?

Thank you for any operational insights you can share.

Best regards,
Mubashir Anwar
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/3RJ45WJJ63KNKUCNT7A5BCVQXBVONJ3V/



-- 
  ++ytti
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/XT52O5NJWPSTDXL6A7E2DLFBKJ5BR7GC/


Current thread: