IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] [sidr] BGPsec without Extended Messages (draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol)

Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> Wed, 05 April 2017 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <sean@sn3rd.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04166126DC2 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 07:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sn3rd.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cCHJhDCKDvIm for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 07:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC29812945C for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id p22so12844153qka.3 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sn3rd.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=QqwgyG9yaxQ51xzCOtVVoVu5CgRq7B8xdY/tohlfSck=; b=WQp9+XVCGznWOhnIg+XSHzlJVkQuYfw75JkkKoJn7f5wsb3hqwRDZyseOZz7vC1Qkd hJTgorAA0B0XuJqQRZfAlyTGLT5+xwh6CzKO9uBlTqei93K4Zlljn4mavl7aDkkLK7hH GrvFzc/exXapQK0BS7rT7XK0Foi0I0iWHMASo=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=QqwgyG9yaxQ51xzCOtVVoVu5CgRq7B8xdY/tohlfSck=; b=uUfZVzFC+zwHiu2yotWZlHVCM4ZetpPpVwHsEkLH9gw64tu8CPCihLgqYHbduxJIlU X2aHRoxkH6N0sqxFEsWU96rmyJRupHDPfRqEC8pBRDOdrf+rUdRm4HhuprUhWzFLkNWs AVqIbxJJy98mJmi42gFqpakdQovAJBFlWxljf9lfiJ8XQwUeLBkSoicCqZ23XCPihfRr hy4Gr4rgg1zCKeW8FLVvv0Ty2l6dfA0RUXAUr1bgALjoyxOZFOGDw5VE2z/+4jiBmko9 DI/rjRVerfuMNL6AO5OwbfE5qKmxR0e/oQzoKMp559LycW6qWZpfEuLD/ciYMHhQB3aT JbEQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2XexsYSfIK800QmYG394kYO7jt8yRJ7Ka2wQrySGbo9rESRO3ZINxaayjQ7LG44A==
X-Received: by 10.55.25.81 with SMTP id k78mr17291251qkh.224.1491403749032; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.0.18] ([96.231.222.158]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q66sm14102993qkd.69.2017.04.05.07.49.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Apr 2017 07:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
In-Reply-To: <36894BDC-01FC-41A5-B7B8-BC91204AE1D2@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 10:49:06 -0400
Cc: Matthew Lepinski <mlepinski@ncf.edu>, "draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol@ietf.org>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "sidrops@ietf.org" <sidrops@ietf.org>, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" <sidr-chairs@ietf.org>, "sidr@ietf.org" <sidr@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <EE8D4558-4EF4-43B3-AA65-B22FFCAF72E3@sn3rd.com>
References: <65677770-43DB-4CE0-8E81-B35B9A82DF6F@cisco.com> <CA++NScEB1=TswjnszJm8_kghE2n8MX9gyDPePRsqqNALKyA6=g@mail.gmail.com> <36894BDC-01FC-41A5-B7B8-BC91204AE1D2@cisco.com>
To: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/HzcrrRBmsx9imoz5SLyIWt1aF6o>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [sidr] BGPsec without Extended Messages (draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 14:49:17 -0000

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 13:18, Alvaro Retana (aretana) <aretana@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> To me, the main purpose of changing the BGPsec spec is to depend on whatever BGP does, and not on a future extension that may or may not be in the form it is today.  However, if we keep the reference to the known standard (rfc4271), then we should not have to update this document because we would just inherit whatever BGP does.

This sound reasonable to me.

spt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email