Did your BGP crash today?

Thomas Mangin thomas.mangin at exa-networks.co.uk
Sat Aug 28 06:23:50 CDT 2010


Those tools are not suitable for regression testing ( I know I wrote exabgp ) not saying they could not be adapted though.

Fizzing may return crashes or issues with the daemon but it is unlikely. You need predictable input for regression testing and in our particular case how do you detect a corruption without knowing what the behaviour of the router should be on that particular input.

If it was that simple vendors would have done it
---
from my iPhone

On 28 Aug 2010, at 13:09, Leen Besselink <leen at consolejunkie.net> wrote:

> On 08/28/2010 11:39 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
>> On (2010-08-28 18:20 +0900), Randy Bush wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> a bgp regression suite would not have caught this as it was not a
>>> repeat.  but it sure would be useful to implementors.
>>> 
>> Naturally 'proving' that non-trivial software works is practically
>> impossible. But stating what non-existing test-suite would or would not
>> have covered is not a topic I'm particularly interested to engage.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> I suggest the test-tool has 2 bgp-sessions and tests if what it put in
> did or did not come out on the otherside and in what shape or form.
> 
> There are already atleast 2 projects which have BGP-code which could
> probably be adapted:
> http://code.google.com/p/exabgp/
> http://code.google.com/p/bgpsimple/
> 
> Can I suggest a fuzzer as wel ?
> 
> 




More information about the NANOG mailing list