Category: worth reading

I wanted to write a “SRv6 makes no little sense” blog post for a long while, but there were always more relevant topics to focus on. Fortunately I won’t have to write it anytime soon; Ethan Banks did a fantastic job with SR(x)6 - Snake Oil Or Salvation?. Make sure you read it before attending the next “SRx6 will save the world” vendor presentation.

Robert Graham wrote a great article explaining why CEOs don’t care much about cybersecurity or any other non-core infrastructure (including networking, unless you happen to be working for a service provider). It’s a must-read if you want to understand the **** you have to deal with in enterprise environments.

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!

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.

Every few years someone within the ITU-T (the standard organization that mattered when we were still dealing with phones, virtual circuits and modems) realizes how obsolete they are and tries to hijack and/or fork the Internet protocol development. Their latest attempt is the “New IP” framework, and Geoff Huston did a great job completely tearing that stupidity apart in his May 2020 ISP column. My favorite quote:

It’s really not up to some crusty international committee to dictate future consumer preferences. Time and time again these committees with their lofty titles, such as “the Focus Group on Technologies for Network 2030” have been distinguished by their innate ability to see their considered prognostications comprehensively contradicted by reality! Their forebears in similar committees missed computer mainframes, then they failed to see the personal computer revolution, and were then totally surprised by the smartphone.

Enjoy!

Loved the article from Philip Laplante about environmental antipatterns. I’ve seen plenty of founderitis and shoeless children in my life, but it was worshipping the golden calf that made me LOL:

In any environment where there is poor vision or leadership, it is often convenient to lay one’s hopes on a technology or a methodology about which little is known, thereby providing a hope for some miracle. Since no one really understands the technology, methodology, or practice, it is difficult to dismiss. This is an environmental antipattern because it is based on a collective suspension of disbelief and greed, which couldn’t be sustained by one or a few individuals embracing the ridiculous.

That paragraph totally describes the belief in the magical powers of long-distance vMotion, SDN (I published a whole book debunking its magical powers), building networks like Google does it, intent-based whatever, machine learning…

Stumbled upon an article by Tom Limoncelli. He starts with a programming question (skip that) but then goes into an interesting discussion of what’s really important.

Being focused primarily on networking this is the bit I liked most (another case of Latency Matters):

I once observed a situation where a developer was complaining that an operation was very slow. His solution was to demand a faster machine. The sysadmin who investigated the issue found that the code was downloading millions of data points from a database on another continent. The network between the two hosts was very slow. A faster computer would not improve performance.

The solution, however, was not to build a faster network, either. Instead, we moved the calculation to be closer to the data.

Lesson learned: always figure out the real problem and what the most effective way of solving it as opposed to pushing the problem down the stack or into the cloud.

A pretty good summary of the topic by Drew Conry-Murray: the market is not going to correct itself, it’s very hard to hold manufacturers or developers accountable for security defects in their products, and nothing much will change until someone dies.

And just in case you wonder how "innovative forwarding-looking disruptive knowledge-focused" companies could produce such ****, I can highly recommend The Stupidity Paradox.

Every now and then I find an IT professional claiming we should not be worried about split-brain scenarios because you have redundant links.

I might understand that sentiment coming from software developers, but I also encountered it when discussing stretched clusters or even SDN controllers deployed across multiple data centers.

Finally I found a great analogy you might find useful. A reader of my blog pointed me to the awesome Why Must Systems Be Operated blog post explaining the same problem from the storage perspective, so the next time you might want to use this one: “so you’re saying you don’t need backup because you have RAID disks”. If someone agrees with that, don’t walk away… RUN!

In January 2020 Doug Heckaman documented his experience with VeloCloud SD-WAN. He tried to be positive, but for whatever reason this particular bit caught my interest:

Edge Gateways have a limited number of tunnels they can support […]

WTF? Wasn’t x86-based software packet forwarding supposed to bring infinite resources and nirvana? How badly written must your solution be to have a limited number of IPsec tunnels on a decent x86 CPU?

I hope you're familiar with Clarke's third law (and leave it to your imagination to explain how it relates to SDN ;). In case you want to look beyond the Machine Learning curtain, you might find the Machine Learning Explained article highly interesting. Spoiler: it all started in 1960s with over 2000 matchboxes.