nanog mailing list archives
Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue
From: Job Snijders via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 13:06:07 +0200
On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 11:54:57AM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
it's not really. If the receiving BGP stack understands the attribute, then it should be parsed as default, i.e. carefully. Unfortunately, junos slipped up on this and didn't validate the input correctly, which is a parsing bug. Param validation bugs happen. They shouldn't happen, but they do. If an intermediate router doesn't understand a transitive attribute, it should be ignored, and life should move on.
+1 to what Nick stated. Rob Shakir did a great job describing the various 'scopes' in which BGP errors can appear and what that means for the 'blast radius'. I recommend everyone to read section 3 of this draft document: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-grow-ops-reqs-for-bgp-error-handling-07#section-3 Kind regards, Job
Current thread:
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Bjørn Mork (Sep 01)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Nick Hilliard (Sep 01)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Bjørn Mork (Sep 01)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Eugeniu Patrascu (Sep 01)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Bjørn Mork (Sep 01)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Nick Hilliard (Sep 01)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Job Snijders via NANOG (Sep 01)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Bjørn Mork (Sep 01)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Tom Beecher (Sep 05)
- Re: JunOS/FRR/Nokia et al BGP critical issue Nick Hilliard (Sep 01)