Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 BGP filtering André Chapuis,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How to Multi-Home Avi Freedman VP Engineering AboveNet Communications.
Advertisements

A S I A P A C I F I C N E T W O R K I N F O R M A T I O N C E N T R E APNIC Open Policy Meeting Address Policy (Procedures) SIG 1 March 2001.
1 Securing BGP using DNSSEC Lutz Donnerhacke db089309: 1c1c 6311 ef09 d819 e029 65be bfb6 c9cb.
IPv4 Addresses. Internet Protocol: Which version? There are currently two versions of the Internet Protocol in use for the Internet IPv4 (IP Version 4)
Technical Aspects of Peering Session 4. Overview Peering checklist/requirements Peering step by step Peering arrangements and options Exercises.
1 Overview of policy proposals Policy SIG Wednesday 26 August 2009 Beijing, China.
© J. Liebeherr, All rights reserved 1 Border Gateway Protocol This lecture is largely based on a BGP tutorial by T. Griffin from AT&T Research.
Advanced Multihoming BGP Traffic Engineering 1. Service Provider Multihoming Previous examples dealt with loadsharing inbound traffic – Of primary concern.
1 Interdomain Routing Protocols. 2 Autonomous Systems An autonomous system (AS) is a region of the Internet that is administered by a single entity and.
The need for BGP AfNOG Workshops Philip Smith. “Keeping Local Traffic Local”
Best Practices for ISPs
TCP/IP Protocol Suite 1 Chapter 5 Objectives Upon completion you will be able to: IP Addresses: Classless Addressing Understand the concept of classless.
APNIC Internet Routing Registry An introduction to the IRR TWNIC Meeting, 3 December 2003 Nurani Nimpuno, APNIC.
Practical and Configuration issues of BGP and Policy routing Cameron Harvey Simon Fraser University.
Mini Introduction to BGP Michalis Faloutsos. What Is BGP?  Border Gateway Protocol BGP-4  The de-facto interdomain routing protocol  BGP enables policy.
Changed made by MF on 29/10/04 Delete Change Add –All slides Obtained Geoff Huston’s review – done on 26/10/2004 Obtained Doc Team’s proof read - done.
Internet Routing (COS 598A) Today: BGP Routing Table Size Jennifer Rexford Tuesdays/Thursdays 11:00am-12:20pm.
CSE5803 Advanced Internet Protocols and Applications (7) Introduction The IP addressing scheme discussed in Chapter 2 are classful and can be summarised.
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. ROUTE v1.0—5-1 Implementing Path Control Assessing Path Control Network Performance Issues.
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. ROUTE v1.0—4-1 Implement an IPv4-Based Redistribution Solution Assessing Network Routing Performance and.
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. ROUTE v1.0—6-1 Connecting an Enterprise Network to an ISP Network Considering the Advantages of Using BGP.
Border Gateway Protocol (BGP4) Rizwan Rehman, CCS, DU.
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.ROUTE v1.0—6-1 Connecting an Enterprise Network to an ISP Network Planning the Enterprise-to-ISP Connection.
Allocations vs Announcements A comparison of RIR IPv4 Allocation Records with Global Routing Announcements Geoff Huston May 2004 (Activity supported by.
BGP Policy Control.
Computer Networks Layering and Routing Dina Katabi
Yaping Zhu with: Jennifer Rexford (Princeton University) Subhabrata Sen and Aman Shaikh (AT&T Labs-Research) Impact of Prefix-Match.
Traffic Engineering for CDNs Matt Jansen Akamai Technologies APRICOT 2015.
Routing Policy Tutorial NANOG 24 - Miami Daniel Golding
Simple Multihoming 1. Why Multihome? Redundancy – One connection to internet means the network is dependent on: Local router (configuration, software,
NOC Lessons Learned TEIN2 and CERNET Xing Li
BGP Best Current Practices
1 © 2000, Cisco Systems, Inc. Session # Presentation_ID Border Gateway Protocol.
IPv4 Addresses. Internet Protocol: Which version? There are currently two versions of the Internet Protocol in use for the Internet IPv4 (IP Version 4)
TCOM 515 Lecture 6.
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. ROUTE v1.0—6-1 Connecting an Enterprise Network to an ISP Network BGP Attributes and Path Selection Process.
Introduction to The Internet ISP Workshops 1 Last updated 24 April 2013.
Introduction to Classless Routing
Skeeve Stevens APNIC 29, Kuala Lumpur Alternative criteria for subsequent IPv6 allocations Prop-083v002.
Chapter 6 VLSM and CIDR.
Chapter 9. Implementing Scalability Features in Your Internetwork.
APNIC Internet Routing Registry An introduction to the IRR TWNIC Meeting, 3 December 2003 Nurani Nimpuno, APNIC.
BGP operations and security draft-jdurand-bgp-security-02.txt Jerome Durand Gert Doering Ivan Pepelnjak.
A proposal to lower the IPv4 minimum allocation size and initial criteria in the AP region prop-014-v001 Policy SIG APNIC17/APRICOT 2004 Feb
David Wetherall Professor of Computer Science & Engineering Introduction to Computer Networks Hierarchical Routing (§5.2.6)
BCNET Conference April 29, 2009 Andree Toonk BGPmon.net Prefix hijacking! Do you know who's routing your network? Andree Toonk
Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.
Addressing Issues David Conrad Internet Software Consortium.
Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) W.lilakiatsakun. BGP Basics (1) BGP is the protocol which is used to make core routing decisions on the Internet It involves.
R1R1 GD ERER ISP 1 R2R2 R3R3 R4R4 ISP 2 Normal Data Traffic AS100 AS600AS700 AS65535 AS200 Normal Operation: R1 peer to IPS1 with EBGP, and R2 peer to.
BGP Filtering (Policy Routing). BGP Filtering Can Apply our Routing Policy Controlling the sending and receiving updates Prefix Filtering AS_Path Filtering.
Information-Centric Networks04b-1 Week 4 / Paper 2 Understanding BGP Misconfiguration –Rahil Mahajan, David Wetherall, Tom Anderson –ACM SIGCOMM 2002 Main.
IPv6 Routing Considerations Masaru Mukai / POWERDCOM Kuniaki Kondo / IIJ.
Filtering Spoofed Packets Network Ingress Filtering (BCP 38) What are spoofed or forged packets? Why are they bad? How to keep them out.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—3-1 Route Selection Using Policy Controls Filtering with Prefix-Lists.
Securing BGP Bruce Maggs. BGP Primer AT&T /8 Sprint /16 CMU /16 bmm.pc.cs.cmu.edu Autonomous System Number Prefix.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—5-1 Customer-to-Provider Connectivity with BGP Connecting a Multihomed Customer to a Single Service.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—5-1 Customer-to-Provider Connectivity with BGP Understanding Customer-to-Provider Connectivity.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—3-1 Route Selection Using Policy Controls Applying Route-Maps as BGP Filters.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—3-1 Route Selection Using Policy Controls Using Multihomed BGP Networks.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—3-1 Module Summary The multihomed customer network must exchange BGP information with both ISP.
Bringing External Connectivity and Experimenters to GENI Nick Feamster Georgia Tech.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—5-1 Customer-to-Provider Connectivity with BGP Connecting a Multihomed Customer to Multiple Service.
1 APNIC Open Address Policy Meeting Special Interest Group Session March 2nd, Korea, Seoul.
Boarder Gateway Protocol (BGP)
Border Gateway Protocol
BGP Best Current Practices
IPv4 Addresses.
More Specific Announcements in BGP
Lessons Learned TEIN2 and CERNET
Presentation transcript:

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 BGP filtering André Chapuis,

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Motivation: Internet routing table size evolution

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Internet routing table size  Do we really need these 120’000 routes ?  Number of contiguous prefixes with same origin/path * i *> / i *> / i … 50 prefixes with same origin… *> / i *> / I * / i * / I.. 20 prefixes with same origin… * / i

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Impact of Internet routing table size growth  Router memory (with 125’000 routes) –BGP table memory (21MB) –Routing table memory (21MB) –CEF table memory (21MB) –Distributed on every line card (limit=smallest card) –Second BGP feed (+10M – 20M) –Still many Cisco 7206 with NPE-150: 128MB RAM is a maximum  Crash experience with 128MB and two full feeds on a CPE  Router CPU  More updates -> more activity

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Requirements  Solution with minimal (no) impact on customers  No routing holes = global reachability is granted  Multihomed customers must keep all BGP resiliency  Minimal manual tuning wanted  No frequent changes

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Solution chosen  Prefix-filtering –RIR minimal allocation sizes –Historical classfull addresses (A and B) –Ad-hoc filters based on size / region  Semi-default routes –To guarantee reachability in case of misconfiguration  Exceptions –Customer prefixes –Chosen prefixes (private peerings) –Swiss peerings

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Prefix filtering (1)  RIR minalloc: – – – –Ex: /19 within 62/8 –Changes needed only when IANA allocates e new block to a RIR -> not too frequent (every 3-6 month)  Historical ‘Classful’ address-space: –Class B: /22 –Class A: /21

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Prefix filtering (2)  Ad-hoc: –199/8, ARIN region, default /22 with exceptions –200/7, LACNIC region, default /22 with exceptions –202/7, APNIC region, default /22 but 202/10 is /24 –204/6, ARIN region, default /22 with exceptions  Current table size within AS3303: –60’793 as seen from Oregon-IX –63’147 as seen internally (customer more-specifics) –125’000 average for ISPs not filtering

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Prefix filtering (3)  Filter example … ip prefix-list martians seq permit /8 le 21 ip prefix-list martians seq permit /8 le 21 ip prefix-list martians seq permit /6 le 21 ip prefix-list martians seq permit /5 le 21 ip prefix-list martians seq permit /7 le 21 ip prefix-list martians seq permit /7 le 20 ip prefix-list martians seq permit /7 le 19 …

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Semi-default routes (1): the problem  Some end-users (or ISPs) get an allocated block from a RIR (say /18), but announce only a part of it (say a /23) without aggregate !  Example: – / i –ALLOCATED PA is /18 -> not routed –Network not reachable –The responsible is the owner of the block/source ISP  But there are so many cases like that.  Therefore we use semi-default routes

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Semi-default routes (2)  Aggregates created to cover RIR space: –62/8, 80/7, 212/7, 217/8 routed towards EU transit ISP –ARIN/APNIC/LACNIC space towards US transit  Class A/B –Class B: 128/3, 160/5 and 168/6 towards US transit –No semi-default for class A  Aggregates announced to customers –Tagged with a special community (3303:9999)

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Semi-default routes (3)  = Static routes redistributed into BGP ip route POS3/1 router bgp network route-map semi-default  Original idea was to ask our transit ISP to send us them via BGP  Upstream ISP reluctant to the original idea (particularly the USA ones…)  We provide them to our customers

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Exceptions. We don’t filter for:  Some private peerings with fair amount of traffic –Google, Yahoo, Hotmail  Customer prefixes –Accept anything from customers (up to /24) –Prefixes with an origin AS included within our as-set must be accepted to guarantee reachability  Swiss routes (= routes received on CH-peerings in CH) –Routes received from CH-peers are not subject to the filters –Because there are few of them –And we are a swiss ISP

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Customer prefixes

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Customer prefixes (configuration) route-map set-ipp-peer permit 10 match as-path 198 ! route-map set-ipp-peer permit 20 match ip address prefix-list martians ! ip as-path access-list 198 permit _(AS-SWCMGLOBAL)$ ! ip prefix-list martians seq 3000 permit /8 le 21 ip prefix-list martians seq 4000 permit /8 le 21 ip prefix-list martians seq 6000 permit /8 le 21 ip prefix-list martians seq 8000 permit /7 le 21

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Results (1)  BGP Updates/min before and after the filter

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Results (2)  Stability improved –Number of updates/minute reduced by 40% –Last month de-aggregation of Bellsouth –About 1000 more prefixes injected –Transparent for AS3303  Traffic engineering done by ISPs outside CH with more-specifics from PA blocks is ignored by AS3303  Forced ‘traffic engineering’ neglectible –Small amount of traffic following the semi-defaults routes – /6 has less than 500kb/s average traffic –For a total of 10’000 prefixes

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Other ISPs filtering  Verio AS2914 –Class A space (i.e., 0/1), accept /22 and shorter –Class B space (i.e., 128/2), accept /22 and shorter –Class C space (i.e., 192/3), accept /24 and shorter  SWITCH AS559 –RIR minalloc + /19 in ClassA/B  Jippi (Eunet Finland) AS6667 –192/7 : accept /24 and shorter –Rest: accept /21 and shorter

Swinog-7, 22nd october 2003 Conclusions  Less memory needed (and CPU)  No reachability issues with semi-default routes  BGP customers satisfied  …lots of ‘useless’ routes in the Internet…  Need to have at least one transit provider  Method does not work for Tier-1 (transit-free ISPs)  Good solution for (small) ISPs with limited memory budget