Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BGPreader: [warn] process_one_attr failed, stopping attribute processing #79

MarcinNaw opened this issue Jan 7, 2019 · 1 comment


Copy link

Creating a textual dump of recent RIPE RIS bview files fails with:

$ bgpreader -d singlefile -o rib-file,latest-bview.gz > /dev/null 
WARN: No time windows specified, defaulting to all available data
2019-01-07 16:51:43 [warn] ERROR attribute is truncated: expected=10286 remaining=4184

2019-01-07 16:51:43 [warn] process_one_attr failed, stopping attribute processing

I receive this message after a partial output (~1.2M lines) using the latest BGPreader version (1.2.1).

An older version of BGPreader (1.1.0) is also affected.

$ ./bgpreader -d singlefile -o rib-file,/tmp/latest-bview.gz -w 0,-2 > /dev/null
2019-01-07 16:35:38 [warn] ERROR attribute is truncated: expected=10286 remaining=4184

bgpreader: bgpdump_lib.c:888: process_one_attr: Assertion `-1 == attr->local_pref' failed.

Unfortunately, we could not get more information by activating debug output.

This file works:
This file does not work:

Copy link

I am pretty sure this is a bug in the library (libbgpdump) we use to parse MRT data. I believe it has been fixed in the upstream library, but since BGPStream v2 no longer uses this library, we have not yet backported the fix. My understanding is that this bug only affects RRC00 -- is that your experience too?

I'd suggest that you might want to try the BGPStream v2 beta ( If switching to v2 is not possible, please let me know and we can try and find some time to backport a fix.

digizeph added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 4, 2019
This fix is introduced to ripencc's bgpdump library at
This fix should fix the issue #79
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
None yet

No branches or pull requests

2 participants