1. Route Servers: What, Why, and How? Andy Davidson Allegro Networks / LONAP August 2014 Peer 2.0/SFO

2. sharyn morrow - http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharynmorrow/1923985105/http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharynmorrow/1923985105/Motivation Instant Traffic on Connection Encourage Peering Sell Ports, Grow Traffic

3. Route Servers / MLP 1 Session, Many Peers Make it reliable Make it optional Election night crowd, Wellington, 1931. Alexander Turnbull Library

5. Route server does NOT modify the next-hop BGP attribute of the learned prefix.

7. Not providing transit BGP session with 192.168.10.1 Learn prefix for 10.10.0.0/16 from 192.168.10.5 Learn prefix for 10.20.0.0/16 from 192.168.10.10 Next hop and BGP peer are different Traffic never flows through the route-server

8. Bilateral peering BGP session with 192.168.10.10 Learn prefix for 10.30.0.0/16 from 192.168.10.10 Next hop and BGP session are the same.

9. From: noc@clevernet.net.uk To: support@lonap.netsupport@lonap.net Subject: Clevernet Route Server Dear Colleagues, Please can I ask that AS65534 turn up sessions facing the IXP route server. My AS-SET is AS-CLEVERNET for v4 and v6 routes. My router is at 193.203.5.x, 2001:7f8:17::FFFE:1. Yours, CleverNoc

10. router bgp 123 no bgp enforce-first-as (- very important for route servers) neighbor lonaprs peer-group (- own group recommended) neighbor lonaprs remote-as 8550 neighbor lonaprs description LONAP MLP neighbor lonaprs route-map lonap-rs-out out neighbor lonaprs route-map lonap-rs-in in neighbor lonaprs maximum-prefix 20000 neighbor 193.203.5.1 peer-group lonaprs neighbor 193.203.5.2 peer-group lonaprs route-map lonap-rs-out match as-path 10 (- or however you prefix filter) set community xxx route-map lonap-rs-in set local-preference 1000 (- or whatever you use for peers)

11. protocols { bgp { group lonap-rs { peer-as 8550; description “LONAP Route Servers”; family inet { unicast { prefix-limit { maximum 20000; teardown 99; } import [ lonap-in rejectpolicy ]; export [ as65534 bgp_customers aggregate rejectpolicy ]; neighbor 193.203.5.1; neighbor 193.203.5.2; }

13. Send my prefix (e.g. deaggregate, or selective policy) only to certain peers 65534:their-as Hide my prefix from transit customer 0:their-as Outbound filters

14. Accept Prefix Do nothing. Have a nice day. Reject prefix. Build an as-path list of asn to filter, reject. Inbound filters

15. Advanced Filtering Hide pfx from specific peers. Community 0:peer-as Send specific pfx to peers. Community 8550:peer-as 32bit? Big community draft Rich Renomeron - http://www.flickr.com/photos/rrenomeron/2834296612/http://www.flickr.com/photos/rrenomeron/2834296612/

16. Hygienic Peering Enforced IRR database filtering on MLP (you do not need to filter the MLP) Required to peer with several MLP servers ? Config change via automation system to reduce human error impact

17. End Site Transit A Transit B Peer C IX MLP The Tale of the Single RIB Originates 10.0.0.0/24

18. End Site Transit A Transit B Peer C IX MLP Originates 10.0.0.0/24 Best Path A filters C What will happen here? Valid path via B is not seen by C. Route Server shadowing

19. End Site Transit A Transit B Peer C IX MLP Originates 10.0.0.0/24 A filters C A C learns path via B Best path per RIB What will happen now? BC

20. Disadvantages of route server peering Separation of control plane and traffic Not really a disadvantage, but a risk Layer 2 problem manifesting in visibility of route-server, but not next-hop It can be mitigated by the IXP Loss of individual, personal relationships with peer No worse than Internet Transit Less scope to say “no” Only a problem for networks with a large geographic scope You sometimes say no to prevent traffic hairpinning

21. ? Andy Davidson andy.davidson@allegro.net _______________________ CTO, Allegro Networks Director, LONAP Ltd. +44 161 200 1610