On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 01:09:47PM +0200, Leen Besselink wrote:
On 08/28/2010 11:39 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2010-08-28 18:20 +0900), Randy Bush wrote:
a bgp regression suite would not have caught this as it was not a repeat. but it sure would be useful to implementors.
Naturally 'proving' that non-trivial software works is practically impossible. But stating what non-existing test-suite would or would not have covered is not a topic I'm particularly interested to engage.
I suggest the test-tool has 2 bgp-sessions and tests if what it put in did or did not come out on the otherside and in what shape or form.
There are already atleast 2 projects which have BGP-code which could probably be adapted: http://code.google.com/p/exabgp/ http://code.google.com/p/bgpsimple/
Can I suggest a fuzzer as wel ?
There was once cert-bgp-testcases-28may03-final.tar.gz which did some testing (including expected responses). I use it from time to time.
From the README: For more information see the NANOG 28 (http://www.nanog.org) presentation ...
"BGP Vulnerability Testing: Separating Fact from FUD" by Sean Convery (sean@cisco.com) and Matthew Franz (mfranz@cisco.com) But my quick googeling failed to locate a link to it. -- :wq Claudio