Re: [GROW] A new bgpdump tool

[Yasuhiro Ohara <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

> tools. I'm going to summarize it and send the list to the mailing-list.

Below is the list of tools and some papers.

* Tools.

- libbgpdump
  written in C.
  <https://bitbucket.org/ripencc/bgpdump/wiki/Home>

- zebra-dump-parser
  written in Perl.
  <https://github.com/rfc1036/zebra-dump-parser>

- java-mrt library
  written in Java.
  <https://github.com/paaguti/java-mrt>

- UCLA bgpparser
  written in C++.
  <http://irl.cs.ucla.edu/software/bgpparser.html>

- mrtparse
  written in Python.
  <https://github.com/YoshiyukiYamauchi/mrtparse>

- bgpdump2
  written in C.
  <https://github.com/yasuhiro-ohara-ntt/bgpdump2>


* route leaks
  - <https://ripe69.ripe.net/presentations/157-RIPE-69-Routing-WG.pdf>
    <https://ripe69.ripe.net/archives/video/10076/>
  - <http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-problem-definition-00.pdf>
  - <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sriram-route-leak-detection-mitigation-00>
    (to be presented in the IDR WG meeting in Dallas)

* AS relations

  - Linxin Gao, "On inferring autonomous system relationships in the internet",
    IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), Volume 9 Issue 6, December 2001,
    Pages 733-745.
    <https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=504611.504616>

  - Giotsas, V., "Valley-free violation in Internet routing -
    Analysis based on BGP Community data",
    <http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6363987>

  - "AS Relationships, Customer Cones, and Validation"
    <http://www.caida.org/~amogh/papers/asrank-IMC13.pdf>

  - "A Survey of Interdomain Routing Policies"
    <https://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe/papers/survey.pdf>

Best regards,
Yasu

From: Yasuhiro Ohara <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [GROW] A new bgpdump tool
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 14:27:05 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

> 
> Mr. Kemp,
> 
> Thank you for the information.
> 
> I have been kindly informed, also by others, of other BGP dump parsing
> tools. I'm going to summarize it and send the list to the mailing-list.
> 
> Yes, I'm interested in route leaks. Now I'm wondering what kind of
> functions are beneficial in a BGP dump tool to help people check or
> find the route leaks. Please let me know if you have some idea.
> 
> Best regards,
> Yasu
> 
> From: John Kemp <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [GROW] A new bgpdump tool
> Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 11:22:34 -0800
> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
> 
>> 
>> For the parser part, you might consider looking at the UCLA
>> bgpparser to see how they dealt with certain issues.
>> 
>> http://irl.cs.ucla.edu/software/bgpparser.html
>> 
>> For path questions, I'm guessing you might want to be looking
>> at route leaks.  If that is the case,
>> 
>> https://ripe69.ripe.net/presentations/157-RIPE-69-Routing-WG.pdf
>> https://ripe69.ripe.net/archives/video/10076/
>> 
>> The related definitions in GROW:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-problem-definition-00.pdf
>> 
>> /jgk
>> 
>> 
>> On 3/4/15 5:17 PM, Yasuhiro Ohara wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I'm developing a new tool that can read routeviews
>>> RIB files (MRT v2 RIB format). I call it "bgpdump2". It is similar, but
>>> with a few additional features, to the libbgpdump.
>>> It is going to be open source (the process is on-going).
>>> 
>>> This e-mail is to consult if there is some interest in such a tool.
>>> I'm considering to provide a presentation in Dallas.
>>> 
>>> The motivations of creating a brand new tool are below.
>>> 1. libbgpdump seemed to have some rooms to speed up, since
>>>    it seems to issue many small-sized read operations, rather than
>>>    making a small number of large-sized read operations.
>>> 2. I wanted to add a few additional features (explained below)
>>>    to such tools.
>>> 3. it didn't seem easy to modify the libbgpdump for me.
>>> 
>>> The additional features include longest prefix matching using a
>>> PATRICIA table inside the command, diff'ing the prefixes
>>> between peers (Note, the BGP prefixes are stored per peer
>>> in the RIB file), and to display of some statistics of RIBs per peer.
>>> 
>>> I am from a R&D division of a tier-1 ISP (i.e., NTT Communications),
>>> and was trying to compare BGP full route routing table instances,
>>> possibly between ISPs.  I expect that such a tool can contribute to
>>> get a detailed view on how/why BGP full route routing tables are
>>> different.  For example, we're going to need the longest matching
>>> lookup function to see if the differentiating prefix is covered by a
>>> shorter prefix.
>>> 
>>> However I'm not greatly succeeding so far, since the reason for
>>> a prefix that is differentiating depends on case by case
>>> (and there are various reasons including "the business relationship"),
>>> and I could not get a summarized view after the comparison of
>>> (say) two BGP full route routing tables.
>>> 
>>> I would like to get some feedback from the community on these things.
>>> I can provide in Dallas some more details of my tool,
>>> some performance benchmark of it,
>>> and some statistics of RouteView's RIB files.
>>> 
>>> Would you kindly share your opinions on this ?
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Yasu
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GROW mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> GROW mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
>