> > What I originally linked to (and another link or two contributed since > then) seem to be people that already built that solution.
What's been shared isn't the same as what I described. faucet / sir are doing the decision part and the signaling part together. I am saying separate them. BGP doesn't know how to make the *decision* you want, but it does know how to process *signals* that you send it. On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 10:58 AM Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: > Right. > > Only I'm not the guy to build that solution. > > What I originally linked to (and another link or two contributed since > then) seem to be people that already built that solution. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Tom Beecher" <beec...@beecher.cc> > *To: *"Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> > *Cc: *"Mel Beckman" <m...@beckman.org>, "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> > *Sent: *Friday, January 6, 2023 9:51:43 AM > *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir) > > Gotcha. > > Setup a Quagga/Bird box. Do your top talker analysis , use that box to > inject the routes you deem important with communities. On your routers , > create policy structure to only take a default plus those communities. > > Obviously lots of devils in the details of the implementation , but > something like that is all you need to do. > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 10:29 Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: > >> Maybe? >> >> I don't need any additional performance tests, though. Just watching >> which prefixes are the top talkers and leaving the rest to default. >> >> I'm not looking at this to do what a BGP optimizier would do and find the >> best tested path to the top talkers and then massage BGP to get it routed >> that way. Determine the top talkers, then let BGP do its thing for those >> top talkers. >> >> I don't want to manually say X traffic from Y POP manually goes here, but >> I don't want to just leave it to default routing either. Something in the >> middle. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >> ------------------------------ >> *From: *"Tom Beecher" <beec...@beecher.cc> >> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> >> *Cc: *"Mel Beckman" <m...@beckman.org>, "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> >> *Sent: *Friday, January 6, 2023 9:16:19 AM >> >> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir) >> >> Thanks for this example. >> >> It sounds like you are describing egress peer engineering, but kinda in >> reverse. >> >> In 'traditional' EPE, the routers have all the routes, and you are using >> the external controller to perform the performance tests that matter to >> you, and signal the network where to take the traffic based on those tests. >> >> It seems like you want to do the same thing , but instead of having the >> controller signal the network where to carry bits, you want the controller >> to signal the networks what routes are present, and direct the bits that >> way. >> >> Do I have this right? >> >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 4:12 PM Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: >> >>> I hesitated to get too specific in examples because someone is going to >>> drag the conversation into the weeds. >>> >>> Let's take the the Dallas - New Orleans - Atlanta example where I have a >>> connection from New Orleans to Dallas and a connection from New Orleans to >>> Atlanta. >>> >>> Let's say I peer with Netflix in both markets. Netflix chooses to serve >>> me out of Atlanta, for whatever reason. Say my default route sends my >>> traffic to Dallas. That's not where Netflix wanted it, so now I have to go >>> from Dallas to Atlanta, whether that's my circuit or across the public >>> Internet. Potentially, it's on MPLS and it rides back through the New >>> Orleans router to get back to Atlanta. That's a long trip when I already >>> had a better path, the less-than-full-fib router just didn't know about it. >>> Given that Netflix is a sizable amount of traffic in an eyeball ISP, that's >>> a lot of traffic to be going the wrong way. If the website for Viktor's >>> Arctic Plunge in Siberia was hosted in Atlanta, I wouldn't give two craps >>> that the traffic went the wrong way because A), I'll probably never go >>> there and B) when someone does, it won't be meaningfully enough traffic to >>> accommodate. >>> >>> Someone's going to tell me to put a full-table router in New Orleans. >>> Maybe I should. Okay, so maybe I have a POP in Ashford, Alabama. It has >>> transport to New Orleans and Atlanta. There aren't enough grains of sugar >>> in Ashford, Alabama to justify a current-generation, full table router. Now >>> I'm even closer to Atlanta, but default may point to New Orleans. >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From: *"Mel Beckman" <m...@beckman.org> >>> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> >>> *Cc: *"Joe Maimon" <jmai...@jmaimon.com>, "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> >>> *Sent: *Thursday, January 5, 2023 2:54:27 PM >>> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir) >>> >>> Mike, >>> >>> I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “suboptimal“ routing. Even >>> though the Internet uses AS path length for routing, many of those path >>> lengths are bogus, and don’t really represent any kind of path performance >>> value. For example, a single AS might hide many hops in an MPLS network as >>> a single hop, obscuring asymmetric routing and other uglies. Prepending >>> also occurs when destinations are trying to enforce their own engineering >>> policies, which often conflict with yours or mine. >>> >>> So what do you mean by “suboptimal“? Are you thinking that the “best” >>> path in BGP tables actually meant you were getting a performance benefit? >>> Because that’s definitely not the case in today’s Internet. Were were you >>> thinking that you would be going along less congested paths? That’s really >>> at the mercy of the traffic engineering of backbone providers over which we >>> have no control. >>> >>> I generally populate local router FIBs to merel choose an exit point for >>> purposes of load balancing, and nothing more. >>> >>> -mel >>> >>> On Jan 5, 2023, at 12:38 PM, Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I guess I wasn't around for those days. >>> >>> As far as running out, again, assuming the tooling works correctly, I'd >>> think to target fewer routes than you could hold. Maybe 1k routes is all >>> one would need to get a significant percent of the traffic. A lot of room >>> to mess up if you can hold 100k, 500k routes. >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From: *"Joe Maimon" <jmai...@jmaimon.com> >>> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net>, "Christopher Morrow" < >>> morrowc.li...@gmail.com> >>> *Cc: *"NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> >>> *Sent: *Thursday, January 5, 2023 2:30:40 PM >>> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir) >>> >>> >>> >>> Mike Hammett wrote: >>> > I'm not concerned with which technology or buzzword gets the job done, >>> > only that the job is done. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Looking briefly at the couple of things out there, they're evaluating >>> > the top X prefixes in terms of traffic reported by s-flow, where X is >>> > the number I define, and those get pushed into the FIB. One >>> > recalculates every hour, one does so more quickly. How much is >>> > appropriate? I'm not sure. I can't imagine it would *NEED* to be done >>> > all of that often, given the traffic/prefix density an eyeball network >>> > will have. Default routes carry the rest. Default routes could be >>> > handled outside of this process, such that if this process fails, you >>> > just get some sub-optimal routing until repaired. Maybe it doesn't >>> > filter properly and sends a bunch of routes. Then just have a prefix >>> > limit set on the box. Maybe it sends the wrong prefixes. No harm, no >>> > foul. If you're routing sub-optimally internally, when it does hit a >>> > real router with a full FIB, it gets handled appropriately. >>> >>> Unless it loops. >>> >>> The rest sounds nice. But flow caching got a bad rap back in the early >>> worm days. But thats because the situation was a little worse back then. >>> Cache the wrong routes or run out of cache, router dies. So long as >>> thats not the case automating optimization is an extremely valuable goal. >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > I would just be looking for solutions that influence what's in the FIB >>> > and let the rest of the router work as the rest of the router would. >>> >>> The problem comes when the router wont work at all without the FIB >>> routes, like in the olden days. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > ----- >>> > Mike Hammett >>> > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>< >>> https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>< >>> https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>< >>> https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>< >>> https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>< >>> https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>< >>> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > *From: *"Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> >>> > *To: *"Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> >>> > *Cc: *"Tom Beecher" <beec...@beecher.cc>, "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> >>> > *Sent: *Thursday, January 5, 2023 12:27:08 PM >>> > *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir) >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 11:18 AM Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net >>> > <mailto:na...@ics-il.net>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Initially, my thought was to use community filtering to push just >>> > IXes, customers, and defaults throughout the network, but that's >>> > obviously still sub-optimal. >>> > >>> > I'd be surprised if a last mile network had a ton of traffic going >>> > to any more than a few hundred prefixes. >>> > >>> > >>> > I think in a low-fib box at the edge of your network your choices are: >>> > "the easy choice, get default, follow that" >>> > >>> > "send some limited set of prefixes to the device, and default, so >>> > you MAY choose better for the initial hop away" >>> > >>> > you certainly can do the second with communities, or route-filters >>> > (prefix-list) on the senders, or.... >>> > you can choose what prefixes make the cut (get the community(ies)) >>> > based on traffic volumes or expected destination locality: >>> > "do not go east to go west!" >>> > >>> > these things will introduce toil and SOME suboptimal routing in some >>> > instances... perhaps it's better than per flow choosing left/right >>> > though and the support calls related to that choice. >>> > >>> > In your NOLA / DFW / ATL example it's totally possible that the >>> > networks in question do something like: >>> > "low fib box in tier-2 city (NOLA), dfz capable/core devices in >>> > tier-1 city (DFW/ATL), and send default from left/right to NOLA" >>> > >>> > Could they send more prefixes than default? sure... do they want to >>> > deal with the toil that induces? (probably not says your example). >>> > >>> > SDN isn't really an answer to this, though.. I don't think. Unless you >>> > envision that to lower the toil ? >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
