Re: Performance metrics used in commercial BGP route optimizers

[Jared Geiger <jared () compuwizz net>]

I was attracted to BGP route optimizers for latency/jitter reduction and
partial black hole detection scenarios.  Our traffic is low enough in
volume that we aren't playing the circuit commit game, but rather
optimizing the path to VoIP customers who don't care that provider Y in
path X-Y-Z had a fiber cut causing issues with their phone service.

They are a piece of the SDN and automation fun. Hopefully the vendors will
devise ways of dealing with traffic load balancing without splitting
prefixes.Or maybe RPKI will become more ubiquitous and leaks won't be as
painful. Similar to how DNSSEC led many ISPs to remove their DNS
redirecting "search services".

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 10:02 AM Michael Still <stillwaxin () gmail com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 12:38 AM Hank Nussbacher <hank () efes iucc ac il>
> wrote:
> > On 16/07/2019 20:41, Job Snijders wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 3:33 PM Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote:
> > > More like do whatever you want in your own house as long as you don't
> infringe upon others.
> > That's where the rub is; when using "BGP optimisers" to influence public
> Internet routing, you cannot guarantee you won't infringe upon others.
> > > The argument against route optimizers (assuming appropriate
> ingress\egress filters) is a religious one and should be treated as such.
> > There is a difference between BGP optimizers and route optimizers.  When
> was the last time you heard a complain about Akamai screwing up the global
> routing table over the past 12 years:
> >
> https://www.akamai.com/us/en/about/news/press/2007-press/akamai-introduces-advanced-communications-protocol-for-accelerating-dynamic-applications.jsp
> > https://developer.akamai.com/legacy/learn/Optimization/SureRoute.html
> >
> > -Hank
>
> Along these same lines I'd like to point out that nearly all or
> possibly even all incidents in recent memory are attributable to a
> single product whereas there has been at least one other product on
> the market for something like 15+ years that AFAIK has not had a
> single incident associated with it (and also does not create more
> specific prefixes as part of its operation). So is it really that one
> product is spoiling the market for the rest here or are they all bad?
>
> --
> [stillwaxin () gmail com ~]$ cat .signature
> cat: .signature: No such file or directory
> [stillwaxin () gmail com ~]$