is this blog post LLM generated?

the explanation makes no sense:

> Because the client is passing pending_delete with no value, the result of Query().Get(“pending_delete”) here will be an empty string (“”), so the API server interprets this as a request for all BYOIP prefixes instead of just those prefixes that were supposed to be removed. The system interpreted this as all returned prefixes being queued for deletion.

client:

     resp, err := d.doRequest(ctx, http.MethodGet, `/v1/prefixes?pending_delete`, nil)

server:

    if v := req.URL.Query().Get("pending_delete"); v != "" {
        // ignore other behavior and fetch pending objects from the ip_prefixes_deleted table
        prefixes, err := c.RO().IPPrefixes().FetchPrefixesPendingDeletion(ctx)
        if err != nil {
            api.RenderError(ctx, w, ErrInternalError)
            return
        }

        api.Render(ctx, w, http.StatusOK, renderIPPrefixAPIResponse(prefixes, nil))
        return
    }

even if the client had passed a value it would have still done exactly the same thing, as the value of "v" (or anything from the request) is not used in that block

▲ subscribed an hour ago | parent | next [-]

That's weird. They only removed some 6 of our prefixes out of perhaps 40 we have with them, so something seems off in this explanation.

▲ bretthoerner 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> even if the client had passed a value it would have still done exactly the same thing, as the value of "v" (or anything from the request) is not used in that block

If they passed in any value, they would have entered the block and returned early with the results of FetchPrefixesPendingDeletion.

From the post:

> this was implemented as part of a regularly running sub-task that checks for BYOIP prefixes that should be removed, and then removes them.

They expected to drop into the block of code above, but since they didn't, they returned all routes.

▲

blibble 3 hours ago | parent [-]

okay so the code which returned everything isn't there

actual explanation: the API server by default returns everything. the client attempted to make a request to return "pending_deletes", but as the request was malformed, the API instead went down the default path, which returned everything. then the client deleted everything.

makes sense now

but is that explanation is even worse

because that means the code path was never tested?

	▲	jbxntuehineoh 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		or they tested it, but not with a dataset that contained prefixes not pending deletion

▲ bstsb 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

doesn't look AI-generated. even if they have made a mistake, it's probably just from the rush of getting a postmortem out prior to root cause analysis

▲ himata4113 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

yep, no mention that re-advertised prefixes would be withdrawn again as well during the entire impact even after they shut it down.