Bad-Routing

And my post on 1st April. Don’t take it as April fool post ;)

Multiple times NIXI’s AS24029 has been reported as acting like transit ASN for multiple networks. I have analysed it in past and this is very much because of route leaks by few specific networks. I have explained difference in peering Vs transit routes and their handling previously on my blog.

In short: A network is supposed to re-announce it’s peering and transit routes only to customer and not to any other peer or upstream. Whenever NIXI’s ASN appears in global routing table, its always the case where one or more networks are re-announcing routes learnt via NIXI to their upstream transits. 

Today I noticed some traffic on my blog from a link from Broadband forum. 

Here’s what poster wrote:

I made a thread a few days ago complaining about BSNL’s horrible routing. Well it looks like it has been fixed. I thank all the guys who made efforts to bring this to BSNL’s notice. Especially Anurag Bhatia who highlighted the issue with much detail on his blog

Softlayer connectivity problem and possible fix.

It’s late night here in India. I am having final 8th semester exams and as usual really bored! 

Though this time we have interesting subjects but still syllabus is pretty boring spreading across multiple books, notes and pdf’s. Anyways I will be out of college after June which sounds good.

Tonight, I found a routing glitch. Yes a routing glitch!! :)

These issues somehow keep my life in orbit and give a good understanding on how routing works over the Internet.

Seems like BSNL-NIB (AS9829) routing with Softlayer’s Singapore datacenter (AS36351) is messed up. Example route between BSNL consumer connection (from Haryana, India) to Softlayer hosted site dot19.com

1 router2 (192.168.1.100) [AS8151/AS28513] 3.136 ms 3.874 ms 4.675 ms
2 117.200.48.1 (117.200.48.1) [AS9829] 29.088 ms 32.395 ms 35.773 ms
3 218.248.173.42 (218.248.173.42) [AS9829] 42.411 ms 44.746 ms 47.176 ms
4 218.248.255.70 (218.248.255.70) [AS9829] 92.977 ms 95.322 ms 97.758 ms
5 64.213.76.69 (64.213.76.69) [AS3043] 323.921 ms 324.594 ms 327.478 ms
6 ix-20-0.tcore2.LVW-LosAngeles.as6453.net (209.58.53.9) [AS6453] 333.339 ms 302.673 ms 303.992 ms
7 if-8-2-1-0.tcore1.PDI-PaloAlto.as6453.net (64.86.252.114) [AS6453] 419.641 ms 423.086 ms 424.411 ms
8 if-2-2.tcore2.PDI-PaloAlto.as6453.net (66.198.127.2) [AS6453] 425.475 ms 426.956 ms 430.239 ms
9 if-9-2.tcore1.TV2-Tokyo.as6453.net (180.87.180.18) [*] 436.026 ms 433.594 ms 434.911 ms
10 180.87.180.50 (180.87.180.50) [*] 439.543 ms 438.330 ms 441.001 ms
11 ae7.bbr01.eq01.tok01.networklayer.com (50.97.18.162) [AS36351] 471.290 ms 446.401 ms 472.233 ms
12 ae1.bbr01.eq01.sng02.networklayer.com (50.97.18.165) [AS36351] 477.914 ms 480.721 ms 485.605 ms
13 ae5.dar01.sr03.sng01.networklayer.com (50.97.18.197) [AS36351] 499.273 ms 502.262 ms 501.499 ms
14 po1.fcr01.sr03.sng01.networklayer.com (174.133.118.131) [AS36351] 489.251 ms po2.fcr01.sr03.sng01.networklayer.com (174.133.118.133) [AS36351] 496.491 ms 497.322 ms
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *

Messed up routing tables of BSNL or lack of co-ordination between Tata Comm & Softlayer?