Issue with Noction IRP default setting (Was: BGP route hijack by AS10990)

Sun Aug 2 12:59:19 UTC 2020

On 1/Aug/20 22:29, Ryan Hamel wrote:
> Job,
>
> I disagree on the fact that it is not fair to the BGP implementation
> ecosystem, to enforce a single piece of software to activate the
> no-export community by default, due to ignorance from the engineer(s)
> implementing the solution. It should be common sense that certain
> routes that should be advertised beyond the local AS, just like
> RFC1918 routes, and more. Also, wasn't it you that said Cisco routers
> had a bug in ignoring NO_EXPORT? Would you go on a rant with Cisco,
> even if Noction add that enabled checkbox by default?
>
> Why are you not on your soap box about BIRD, FRrouting, OpenBGPd,
> Cisco, Juniper, etc... about how they can possibly allow every day
> screw ups to happen, but the same options like the NO_EXPORT community
> are available for the engineer to use? One solution would be to
> implement "BGP Group/Session Profiles" (ISP/RTBH/DDOS Filtering/Route
> Optimizers/etc) or a "BGP Session Wizard" (ask the operator questions
> about their intentions), then automatically generate import and export
> policies based on known accepted practices.
>
> Another solution could be having the BGP daemon disclose the make,
> model family, and exact model of hardware it is running on, to BGP
> peers, and add more knobs into policy creation to match said values,
> and take action appropriately. That would be useful in getting around
> vendor specific issues, as well as belt & suspenders protection.

Most (if not all) people buying BGP optimizers aren't using them for
regular BGP-speaking routers to the rest of the Internet or their core
network.

BGP optimizers serve a unique use-case, which works in the way it does
to create an expected risk as we saw in this and past incidents. On that
basis, I think Job's request to make NO_EXPORT a mandatory default (I'd
go further to say the new default mode can be user-disabled, but with an
unmistakable warning in the UI) is not unreasonable.

Mark.