Live data from Hacker News

"BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

aaka.sh

61–70 of 102 posts

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#61

The pricing is eye watering. 2,100 for 5gbps? Att fiber is $200 per month where I am w a static block.

Residential internet service is oversubscribed and doesn't have an SLA.

I absolutely understand- but is still amazingly cheap. The install was not simple. Despite being oversubscribed I get good speeds both ways. Most devices on my network can only handle 1 gig though my vmware/ synology stuff is 10g. I have business service from att at a different location - Even ordering process was kind of annoying- you get a rep and going around on price / term etc takes a bit vs clicking buy now.

At home I pay for 5 but just need 2. I have failover to comcast. Works well . And yes I do get reported outages on the att side but because failover works I’ve not chased things down.

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#62
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can receive just a default route … You won't lose out on any functionality in dual homing or anything like that. Except you do lose out on best path routing / any other outbound TE, and you’re now restricted to rudimentary load balancing methodologies / manual prefix-specific hackery.

If you aren't multi-homed that doesn't matter at all though. For a home network I'm guessing you are pretty unlikely to do the multi-homing from the house, more likely you will either just have a single upstream or if you are connecting it into your own collocated infrastructure you will do iBGP and let your actual edge BGP routers handle the multi-homed upstreams and sync the full route table etc. I was tempted to d…

> If you aren't multi-homed that doesn't matter at all though.

The parent I was responding to was explicitly claiming no downside to being default-only while multihomed.

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can receive just a default route … You won't lose out on any functionality in dual homing or anything like that. Except you do lose out on best path routing / any other outbound TE, and you’re now restricted to rudimentary load balancing methodologies / manual prefix-specific hackery.

And that's why SD-WAN (software defined wide area network) technology now exists. In a lot of ways it is even better than BGP in that you direct traffic based on performance measurements - either actively through SLA tests or passively watching traffic flows and measuring latency. Using BGP routing based on hop counts and AS paths is akin to following road signs rather than getting live routing that knows traffic for…

SD-WAN technology also creates a number of new ways for unthinking people to shoot themselves in the foot.

Noction is a wonderful example of this. It has sane defaults, but insane customers, who think that it’s a good idea for them to originate more specifics for other outside networks, because they’ll never leak them outside of their own AS (narrator: of course, the prefixes leaked).

I think the most notable example of this recently was Verizon (the insane customer) using Noction (the SD-WAN technology) and doing exactly that, causing mass traffic disruption as they announced more specifics for other peoples prefixes, drawing all that traffic to their own network instead.

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#64
I've been running BGP at home for the last 10 years, and in my area, most ISPs prefer to use Dedicated Internet Access (DIA) for BGP sessions. Fortunately, I live in a place where there are a few smaller ISPs with around 2000-3000 customers that are willing to run BGP with me as a home user. They're impressed that I have BGP, ASN, and IPs as a home user, and I think it's pretty cool too. Additionally, running one more BGP session makes their network appear larger, so they benefit as well.

I currently have a BGP session with one of my ISPs on the 15 euro plan (1 Gbps), and another local ISP is giving me 10 Gbps for free because I'm a test user. Both of these ISPs support BGP, and it's amazing that I can have BGP sessions as a home user. However, it can be challenging to speak with regular sales reps who may not be familiar with BGP. It takes persistence and some effort to get to the network administrator.

It's frustrating that some ISPs make it artificially difficult for home users to obtain a BGP session, even when they're not asking for SLAs or dedicated connections. Technically, you can even run a BGP session over dial-up. It seems like these restrictions are in place to squeeze more money from customers.

It's no secret that we've run out of IPv4 addresses, and I happen to have a /24 subnet just for myself. Even with all my usage, I barely use half of it. There's no rule that says ISPs should only accept /24 or shorter prefixes, and this is contributing to the depletion of IPv4 addresses. I would happily announce a /25 and return the other /25 to the world, but I must have a /24 to do it. This practice of requiring /24 subnets may have made sense in the past to preserve router memory, but with today's technology, it's nonsensical and only serves to artificially deplete available IPv4 addresses.

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#65

The pricing is eye watering. 2,100 for 5gbps? Att fiber is $200 per month where I am w a static block.

Bear in mind these are entirely different classes of products... it's not just about bandwidth.

The monitoring and SLAs alone are probably the most significant differentiators, with these kinds of services you would usually expect an engineer on site within 4 hours to fix problems, and service credits for anything breaching SLA.

I once accidentally snagged a single mode fibre pigtail while moving stuff in a rack. Everything back up after the provider engineers had re-spliced a new pigtail on in less than two hours.

And that's before you consider the dynamic routing side of things.

(And the 3 x /24's that AS54316 have are also not cheap these days, that would cost something like $30-40k these days).

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#66
post #64

I've been running BGP at home for the last 10 years, and in my area, most ISPs prefer to use Dedicated Internet Access (DIA) for BGP sessions. Fortunately, I live in a place where there are a few smaller ISPs with around 2000-3000 customers that are willing to run BGP with me as a home user. They're impressed that I have BGP, ASN, and IPs as a home user, and I think it's pretty cool too. Additionally, running one mor…

> It's frustrating that some ISPs make it artificially difficult for home users to obtain a BGP session

Don't worry, it can be frustrating for businesses too !

Cogent famously nickle-and-dime their customers and consider BGP to be a chargeable extra, even on their IP Transit product which is somewhere where you would expect BGP to be a given.

Of course whether you should do business with Cogent is another matter, especially given their spammy cold-calling tactics, seemingly once you're on their list you can never get off it.

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#67
post #3

Why two NIDs?

It's quite common tbh.

Two different companies, one provides the last mile, one provides the customer service layered on top.

It adds a lot of flexibility, for instance in this case the person was on-net for Verizon, but what if they were not? Then it wouldn't change at all, just the first NID would be a different provider than Verizon.

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#68
post #2

But why?

Primarily for resilience.

In the event that there are issues at the primary location, internet routing protocols will re-route the relevant network prefixes to the secondary location.

The public /24 that was previously routed to their NYC datacenter now goes to that Connecticut house.

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#69
The main issue he wanted to avoid (trees falling on lines) still seems to be there.

Looking at past outages, I feel like given a certain budget, you would get much better uptime with two or more diverse (i.e. not "two fibers going exactly the same path") residential providers than with one commercial one, and for anything but the most critical projects, that's the way to go IMO.

Most importantly though, anything really really important that is so important to use custom fibers should be designed so it also works over the public Internet. Unless degraded service is worse than no service, it doesn't matter that the Internet is theoretically not reliable enough/doesn't provide enough guarantees - at least keep it as a backup so that when a backhoe takes out your custom fiber, you can switch over to the VPN instead of shutting down air traffic at one of Europe's largest airports.

Seems like another major reason for the decision here were SLO/SLAs. Those seem rather meaningless. The residential ISP will not try to max out their 95% SLO - an ISP that's down 1.5 days every month or leaves you offline for 18 days wouldn't be very popular. The commercial SLOs, on the other hand, sound great but they're not magic. If the issue can't be fixed in that time, they will be violated, and you'll typically get a credit for a few months of service - money that you wouldn't have spent in the first place if you just went with residential.

In the end, he still has countless single points of failure, e.g. the above-ground fiber line waiting for a tree, or a non-redundant power supply that he can't easily replace himself. Sure, he has an SLO, but with a dual uplink residential (which is cheaper), a CPE ("modem"/router) failure wouldn't be an outage in a first place.

Re: "BGP at home": getting a DIA circuit installed at home

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by 'full BGP tables' you mean the entire internet routing table, you don't need that to advertise a network on the internet. You can receive just a default route if you wish and still be able to advertise to any carriers you have a connection with. You won't lose out on any functionality in dual homing or anything like that.

> You can receive just a default route … You won't lose out on any functionality in dual homing or anything like that. Except you do lose out on best path routing / any other outbound TE, and you’re now restricted to rudimentary load balancing methodologies / manual prefix-specific hackery.

> Except you do lose out on best path routing / any other outbound TE, and you’re now restricted to rudimentary load balancing methodologies / manual prefix-specific hackery.

After 3-4 hops you're probably hitting a Tier 1 network, after which point you can basically think of the Internet like cloud icon you see in many diagrams, because your route choices are no longer really determining reachability, rather the choices of other people/companies are:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tier_1_network

If you're talking about reachability of a network on another continent or the other side of the planet, your local decisions aren't going to much to determine the path.

The main thing to have locally for routing decisions is the ASNs/networks of the other customers of your ISPs: if Service A is also a customer of ISP #1, you want to send traffic for them through that service instead of ISP #2.

The other nice thing to have is the reachability to the closest IXP, as quite often many CDNs have connections to those.

Beyond knowing IXP reachability and other-customers reachability, I don't think there are many other advantages for a smaller entity on the Internet, so a full Internet-wide BGP is not needed.

Post reply on HN