On 8/21/23 17:44, Tom Beecher wrote:
So,
while this all sounds good, without any specifics on vendor,
box, code, code revision number, fix, year it happened,
current status, e.t.c., I can't offer any meaningful
engagement.
If you clicked Matt's link to the Google search, you could
tell from the results what vendor , model, and year it was
pretty quickly.
I did.
Those are headlines.
The solider that was on the battlefield won't speak to the exact
details.
I won't press, especially because nobody that needed a T1600 back
then probably still runs one today.
Assertion Made : "Networks can scrub communities for memory
or convergence reasons."
Others : "That doesn't seem like a concern. "
Matt : "Here was a real situation that happened where it
was a concern, and the specifics on the reason why."
How is that not 'moving the needle? Because you didn't
get full transcripts of his conversation with the vendor?.
I'm sure a lot of people didn't even know that hashing /
memory hotspotting was even a thing. Now they do.
There are a lot of things that vendors have fixed in BGP that we
shall never know.
What I am saying is that for those that have been fixed, unless
someone can offer up any additional evidence in 2023, the size of
the number of BGP communities attached to a path does not scream
"danger" in 2023 hardware. And the T1600 is a looooong time ago.
Mark.