Re: [Idr] Debugging accepted routes from BGP speakers

Job Snijders <> Mon, 18 November 2019 11:00 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B425120964 for <>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 03:00:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 77SYv6PFksP3 for <>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 03:00:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61F66120930 for <>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 03:00:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id n14so14859202oie.13 for <>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 03:00:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=P3eGb0pZcXFoZZL0560zfO1snyw2LeA+Ieknd/vsiXw=; b=wJC+TD6b0KuhTJrIjJNRstdZ+KgWhsftdocLINB0MfT+qC4BGXTrjMlsHaZdoQZBYf 2ljHGVtliCqHmoho/SqPOfyep+PpINuTO4TrOjjAL9W7uN9kzm7lVEuIy6uaAhv0X47e t4jHXe6HyDsozXzL3HVtLNlB+zRDF2E6jeXBVmvHRuVKlbDS7adus5hIhIrFMALqyZ1/ 0MTn7mVK5OHWH7Q7cx4z4CTlMqjWGoyVa/ByUtlRwRiKrH1QLBTTp7hwnWjy2xLgp7k9 hUHAGVckkQFCb36YrxbVzLDdwxKaP4TW4tREkjlrvorHcfxcTtE3GLbfyYOCC1dP1WUj L/PQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=P3eGb0pZcXFoZZL0560zfO1snyw2LeA+Ieknd/vsiXw=; b=GfBWruOeiCA5XKb4A9lzsp6OOEqJzlTwEDg8Z7CIfn2m/KjWUI8PZTuyWTNZZdu+hG GV4SLqEa3qoFJk/7y4d3AUZdk1avTZUqIKuaENhG50hAYUCYvhcSzRe4ib1UX4aK/hiO rwDnxdVj6caTKNfJdjHTmxEgRskLwBnbZrO4d053NTXI7cYgmBGExSHnbeFcKR0ZKa5A HcydLxrFChFLpallwIx5l+saMh28f1UUpax5CilwdTO7n95mFX4diR1BY54lkVGiQzJy auN2WDsjog1MraurOK+pxu1ll9oTT+t3wih+tESB9ptgZVsHe2ro6FUwcjkKZ2QFpIkA Sk7w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWaFTULsXk1sWUnObv4FvD0GaCJtLZMm62lneNnLZKha2kJ5X9x paKSnsp2pbwrWPXK9dqEjKzl5lrJXlpFuDbj5SaGYg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwEShjBBF3Jg21YF+fJEYcNcOekobSYJ9pZldA26W6dQFkE+ilm2bTSiZT/SrPTuRIPT0UCPqWN+jUKjJjkc80=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:dd0a:: with SMTP id u10mr20077638oig.130.1574074832296; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 03:00:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Job Snijders <>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 11:00:21 +0000
Message-ID: <>
To: Robert Raszuk <>
Cc: Jared Mauch <>, IDR <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Debugging accepted routes from BGP speakers
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 11:00:36 -0000

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 9:50 AM Robert Raszuk <> wrote:
> > The latter one is oftentimes easily validated by Internet-wide looking glasses
> Hmmmm I must say that IMHO both latter and former could be addressed by looking-glass. In fact when I read this draft that was my first question - why not to just look at peer's looking glass ?

Many networks unfortunately do not make BGP Looking Glasses available,
nor is there any standardized interface/method/design/approach for BGP
Looking Glasses. So solely relying on Looking Glasses for this
functionality has proven to be insufficient.

> So perhaps we should simply issue a BCP to say that each AS should run a looking glass server holding all paths and declare victory ? And that could be all GROW WG thing too :)

That is an interesting idea, but in my mind not the exclusive viable solution.

> I already see a bunch of new things we could accomplish in the Internet if we would have those in place consistently everywhere - at least for each transit AS.

Agreed - it would be a nicer world. Through the MANRS initiative I've
pitched the idea to provide more encouragement for networks to provide
looking glasses to the public, but arguably their availability is not

Another observation is that in the "IP Transit Carrier" segment of the
market we see BGP Looking Glasses from time to time, but we rarely see
similar functionality offered by Cloud/CDN providers. Perhaps the
latter category is not interested in running & maintaining looking
glasses, or perhaps there are other constraints that prevent them from
exposing this information via suchs tools. My hope is that by creating
a feedback mechanism in BGP we create more opportunity to share
debugging information specific to EBGP sessions between different

Kind regards,