Centurylink having a bad morning?

Sun Aug 30 16:55:27 UTC 2020

On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 5:21 PM Chris Adams <cma at cmadams.net> wrote:

> Once upon a time, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl at gmail.com> said:
> > How is that acceptable behaviour? I shall remember never to make a
> contract
> > with these guys until they can prove that they won't advertise my
> prefixes
> > after I pull them. Under any circumstances.
>
> Umm, then I guess you won't sign a contract with anybody?  I sure
> wouldn't agree to that.  I don't personally write the routing software,
> so I can't guarantee there isn't a bug in there (actually, since it is
> software, I can guarantee there ARE bugs in there).
>
> We'll see if/when they issue an RFO, but software has bugs, and
> configuration errors have entirely unexpected consequences.  It's
> possible some poor design issue was exposed, or it could be some
> basically unforeseeable incident.
>

Not really the point. BGP is designed such that if I take down the link,
the prefixes MUST be withdrawn within reasonable time. The self healing
aspect of the internet entirely depends on this. Clearly they have some
kind of system that does not respect that by design. I am guessing they
have something homebrewn going on with their route reflectors?

It is like a plane. It is impossible to prove or even design a plane that
can never fall out of the sky. But now we had a plane that crashed in a
very bad way, so that plane (Centurylink) is grounded until they can prove
that something like this can not happen again. Which means they need to
redesign whatever the hell they have going on here.

Regards,

Baldur
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20200830/4a134ea9/attachment.html>