Re: Route leak in Bangladesh

[Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>]

On 1/Jul/15 16:12, Jared Mauch wrote:
>       I would like to see others participate in the dialog with vendors
> so we don't seem to be quite an outlier with "wow, you have really
> large configs".  The vendors haven't quite kept pace with the increase
> in density proportional to the number of configuration lines and
> it sure feels like we are the only people pushing them to improve.

I'm happy to help beat up the vendors (it's a favorite pass time of
mine), but I'll be honest, we don't particularly have this problem in
our network because - well, besides being a reasonably young operation -
we do the opposite where we request customers to provide their prefix
data, and we upload that into the network, together with strict AS_PATH
lists (and max-prefix to boot).

I found RPSL complicated a few years ago, and sort of put that on the
back-burner. I have looked at it less in recent times because I'm
putting quite a bit of work into RPKI (vendor implementation issues have
been slowing me down, though, but we're looking better compared to just
twelve months ago).

So perhaps if there are other operators on this list using RPSL to build
reasonably large configuration files that are testing the limits of
router code, I echo Jared's plea to beat up your vendors and make this a
priority, before we all get taken offline for the 3rd time in one year
by the next boo-boo.

And for anyone running Brocade, extra points if we can get them to
implement RPKI as well :-)...

Mark.