Ok, so this is what the RFC4724, section 2 states:
"For the IPv4 unicast address family, the End-of-RIB
marker is an UPDATE message with the minimum length [BGP-4]. For any
other address family, it is an UPDATE message that contains only the
MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute [BGP-MP] with no withdrawn routes for that
<AFI, SAFI>."
The minimal length of BGPD-4 is 23 bytes.
So were using IPv6 unicast so the UPDATE should contain a
MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute. Here's the wireshark export of the UPDATE
message:
No. Time Source Destination Protocol
Info
114 42.464461 2001:7f8:1::a500:6777:4 2001:7f8:1::a503:4763:1
BGP UPDATE Message
Frame 114 (115 bytes on wire, 115 bytes captured)
Ethernet II, Src: Dell_36:ca:9f (00:1e:4f:36:ca:9f), Dst: Cisco_53:c4:1c
(00:05:00:53:c4:1c)
Internet Protocol Version 6
Transmission Control Protocol, Src Port: bgp (179), Dst Port: 53076
(53076), Seq: 207, Ack: 1, Len: 41
Border Gateway Protocol
UPDATE Message
Marker: 16 bytes
Length: 41 bytes
Type: UPDATE Message (2)
Unfeasible routes length: 0 bytes
Total path attribute length: 0 bytes
0000 00 05 00 53 c4 1c 00 1e 4f 36 ca 9f 86 dd 60 08 ...S....O6....`.
0010 14 2b 00 3d 06 01 20 01 07 f8 00 01 00 00 00 00 .+.=.. .........
0020 a5 00 67 77 00 04 20 01 07 f8 00 01 00 00 00 00 ..gw.. .........
0030 a5 03 47 63 00 01 00 b3 cf 54 61 e2 4d 63 51 ce ..Gc.....Ta.McQ.
0040 f6 d1 50 18 43 80 7b dd 00 00 ff ff ff ff ff ff ..P.C.{.........
0050 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 29 02 00 00 00 ...........)....
0060 00 *12 80 0f 0f 00 02 01 2a 02 00 10 01 03 20 20* ........*.....
0070 *01 00 00*
So it says the total path attribute length is 0 bytes, but I have 18
bits of 'unsolved matterial' at the end of the packet '*12 80 0f 0f 00
02 01 2a 02 00 10 01 03 20 20 **01 00 00*'.
So for a IPv4 unicast 'END-of RIB'-marker it is invalid because of the
junk at the end, and for the IPv6 unicast family the update attribute is
missing the MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute.
So the conclusion is, that this isn't a (valid) 'END-of-RIB'-marker.
On 2/26/09 4:52 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Arnoud Vermeer<arnoud.verm...@ams-ix.net> [2009-02-26 16:21]:
>
>> Foundry advertises the route refresh capability ( RFC2918 ), and not the
>> ability for Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP ( RFC4724 ). In Frame 75
>> the route server sends AS1200 a big update. AS1200 responds in frame 87
>> with a notification of a malformed attribute.
>>
>> The route server also sends an empty update to the other foundry router
>> (XSNEWS), wich crashes there session, because they don't advertise
>> Graceful restart:
>>
> an empty UPDATE is valid no matter what, wether graceful restart was
> advertised or not.
