Every now and then a security researcher “discovers” a tunneling protocol designed to be used over a protected transport core and “declares it vulnerable” assuming the attacker can connect to that transport network… even though the protocol was purposefully designed that way, and everyone with a bit of clue knew the whole story years ago (and/or it’s even documented in the RFC).

It was MPLS decades ago, then VXLAN a few years ago, and now someone “found” a “high-impact vulnerability” in GPRS Tunnel Protocol. Recommended countermeasures: whitelist-based IP filtering. Yeah, it’s amazing what a wonderful new tool they found.

Unfortunately (for the rest of us), common sense never generated headlines on Hacker News (or anywhere else).

Julia Evans recently described another awesome Linux tool: entr allows you to run a bash command every time a watched file changes (and it works on Linux and OSX).

I wish I found it years ago…

Snir David wrote a great article explaining why you should focus on documenting stuff you do instead of solving other people’s challenges (or putting out fires) on Slack/Zoom/whatever. Enjoy ;)

Here’s one of the weirdest ideas I’ve found recently: patch together two dangling ends of virtual Ethernet cables with PBR.

To be fair, Jon Langemak used that example to demonstrate how powerful tc could be. It’s always fun to see a totally-unexpected aspect of Linux networking… even though it looks like the creators of those tools believed in Perl mentality of creating a gazillion variants of line noise to get the job done.

Got sick and tired of conference keynotes? You might love the Lies, Damned Lies, and Keynotes rant by Corey Quinn. Here are just two snippets:

They’re selling a fantasy, and you’ve been buying it all along.

We’re lying to ourselves. But it feels better than the unvarnished truth.

Enjoy!

Almost 30 webinars, an online course, and over 140 blog posts later it’s time for another summer break.

While we’ll do our best to reply to support and sales requests (it might take us a bit longer than usual), don’t expect anything deeply technical for the next two months… but of course you can still watch over 280 hours of existing content, listen to over 100 podcast episodes, or read over 3500 blog posts.

We’ll be back with tons of new content in early September.

In the meantime, automate everything, get away from work, turn off the Internet, and enjoy a few days in your favorite spot with your loved ones!

This podcast introduction was written by Nick Buraglio, the host of today’s podcast.

As we all know, BGP runs the networked world. It is a protocol that has existed and operated in the vast expanse of the internet in one form or another since early 1990s, and despite the fact that it has been extended, enhanced, twisted, and warped into performing a myriad of tasks that one would never have imagined in the silver era of internetworking, it has remained largely unchanged in its operational core.

The world as we know it would never exist without BGP, and because of the fact that it is such a widely deployed protocol with such a solid track record of “just working”, the transition to a better security model surrounding it has been extraordinarily slow to modernize.

This blog post was initially sent to the subscribers of my SDN and Network Automation mailing list. Subscribe here.

Adam left a thoughtful comment addressing numerous interesting aspects of network design in the era of booming automation hype on my How Should Network Architects Deal with Network Automation blog post. He started with:

A question I keep tasking myself with addressing but never finding the best answer, is how appropriate is it to reform a network environment into a flattened design such as spine-and-leaf, if that reform is with the sole intent and purpose to enable automation?

A few basic facts first:

After I published the blog post describing how infrastructure cloud provides (example: AWS) might use smart Network Interface Cards (NICs) as the sweet spot to implement overlay virtual networking, my friend Christoph Jaggi sent me links to two interesting presentations:

• Can you still trust your network card
• The Jedi Packet Trick Takes over the Deathstar

Both presentations describe how you can take over a smart NIC with a properly crafted packet, and even bypass CPU on a firewall using smart NICs.

Daniel Teycheney published an excellent blog post with numerous hints on starting your automation journey including:

• Which programming language should you start with?
• Python or Ansible?
• What about Terraform?
• What resources could you use?

Brian Krebs wrote an interesting analysis of CIA’s Wikileaks report. In a nutshell, they were a victim of “move fast to get the mission done” shadow IT.

It could have been worse. Someone with a credit card could have started deploying stuff in AWS ;))

Not that anyone would learn anything from the PR nightmare that followed.

A while ago Russ White invited me to be a guest on his fantastic History of Networking podcast, and we spent almost an hour talking about networking in 1980s and 1990s in what some people love to call “behind iron curtain” (we also fixed that misconception).

One of the readers commenting the ideas in my Disaster Recovery and Failure Domains blog post effectively said “In an active/passive DR scenario, having L3 DCI separation doesn’t protect you from STP loop/flood in your active DC, so why do you care?”

He’s absolutely right - if you have a cold disaster recovery site, it doesn’t matter if it’s bombarded by a gazillion flooded packets per second… but how often do you have a cold recovery site?

Michael Mullany analyzed 20 years of Gartner hype cycles and got some (expected but still interesting) conclusions including:

• Nobody noticed major technologies even when they were becoming mainstream
• Lots of technologies just die, others make progress when nobody is looking
• We might get the idea right and fail badly at implementation
• It takes a lot longer to solve some problems than anyone expected

Enjoy the reading, and keep these lessons in mind the next time you’ll be sitting in a software-defined, intent-based or machine-learning $vendor presentation.

I claimed that “EVPN is the control plane for layer-2 and layer-3 VPNs” in the Using VXLAN and EVPN to Build Active-Active Data Centers interview a long long while ago and got this response from one of the readers:

To me, that doesn’t compute. For layer-3 VPNs I couldn’t care less about EVPN, they have their own control planes.

Apart from EVPN, there’s a single standardized scalable control plane for layer-3 VPNs: BGP VPNv4 address family using MPLS labels. Maybe EVPN could be a better solution (opinions differ, see EVPN Technical Deep Dive webinar for more details).