Did your BGP crash today?

Claudio Jeker cjeker at diehard.n-r-g.com
Sat Aug 28 07:10:30 CDT 2010


On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 01:09:47PM +0200, Leen Besselink 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 ?
> 
> 

There was once cert-bgp-testcases-28may03-final.tar.gz which did some
testing (including expected responses). I use it from time to time.
>From the README:
For more information see the NANOG 28 (http://www.nanog.org) presentation
...

"BGP Vulnerability Testing: Separating Fact from FUD"
by Sean Convery (sean at cisco.com) and Matthew Franz (mfranz at cisco.com)

But my quick googeling failed to locate a link to it.
-- 
:wq Claudio




More information about the NANOG mailing list