Re: BGP user friendliness (was Re: IPv4 flag day)

[borg--- via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

Are you trolling now, right? Because I cant imagine the havoc
this would create on DFZ.

Its already mess, due to 32bit ASNs. Spammers and abusers love those.
They buy 32bit, lend some /24 space, announce, do whatever they want and
then just go away and move to new ranges.

Now imagine every person and their dog running BGP?

Im multihomed (on IPv4 for obvious reasons) and I do NOT need bgp.
Why should I? This stuff is needed to tie ISPs together, not users.
And NAT works great here. I have 2 defaults, some policy routing
to direct given traffic where I need and 2 VPN connections.
I do NOT do LB because I care more about RTT that raw bandwidth, so setup
is a bit simpler.

With (good) IPv6 implementation, I would still use PAT to multihome.
Thats how single individuals should do, no need to waste IPs.
There are ready to use routers that support this setup. I never used one
but I suspect they works okey, any comments?

As for SMB multihome, they should use NAT 1:1 (stateless) to translate
RFC1918 -> Internet. In case of IPv6, address space is big, so they
can grab big enough junks of address space from every ISP they multihome
and arrange correct NAT rules + FW to do so. No need for ASN, no need for
BGP and all that stuff.. Simple and elegant.

The problem is that current IPv6 is fucked up overengineered crap.
They tought about IoT and other nonse, instead to deliver simple
protocol w/ larger address space.

I would like that someone would just get new protocol to migrate to IPv4.
Unfortunately, it wont happen I think, IPv6 is too much deployed. Too much
money was poured to it...


---------- Original message ----------

From: Brian Knight via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
To: North American Network Operators Group <nanog () lists nanog org>
Cc: Brian Knight <ml () knight-networks com>
Subject: BGP user friendliness (was Re: IPv4 flag day)
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2026 22:22:55 -0500

Is there any current effort underway to make BGP more accessible, user-friendly,
or "plug and play?" Anything that might address some of the more technically
demanding aspects of multihoming?

Quick Google says no, but maybe someone has more awareness.

I'm pipe-dreaming BGP multihoming becoming as simple as connecting two Internet
links to a CPE, with no reduction in MTU. No SD-WAN, no tunnels, no NAT. Works
over any kind of link: 5G, wifi, GPON, cable, fiber, carrier pigeon.

CPE vendors might set up web pages that request IPs and an ASN for you. Sets up
ROAs, IRR, and the CPE, start to finish.

Maybe there's a new protocol where the carrier auto-generates a BGP multihoming
token and sends it to the user in the order docs. User sets the token on the CPE
interface facing that provider. Successful negotiation lets the customer
announce their prefix and ASN. CPE and carrier manage it all, no network staff
needed.

-Brian


On 2026-06-21 19:29, Dorn Hetzel via NANOG wrote:
> Sure, have every hotdog cart run BGP, pretty soon we'll need 64 bit AS
> numbers :)
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2026 at 6:29PM Mike Hammett via NANOG <
> nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
>
> > Most pizza shops aren't going to be able to manage BGP.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----
> > Mike Hammett
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >
> > Midwest Internet Exchange
> >
> > The Brothers WISP
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/7AMX6YN4MRTN7UQ5CQFNYI3KJCKKFJMZ/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/MLCNLRSVPV27OAWXJHBQ22W5GPYL2DR7/