IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [RPSEC] BGP Security Requirements v08

Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com> Fri, 20 July 2007 02:45 UTC

Return-path: <rpsec-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IBiUt-0002Cq-OA; Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:45:39 -0400
Received: from rpsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IBiUs-0002Cc-KZ for rpsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:45:38 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IBiUs-0002C0-7W for rpsec@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:45:38 -0400
Received: from 69.37.59.172.adsl.snet.net ([69.37.59.172] helo=harbor.brookfield.occnc.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IBiUr-0005VQ-SA for rpsec@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:45:38 -0400
Received: from harbor.brookfield.occnc.com (harbor.brookfield.occnc.com [69.37.59.172]) by harbor.brookfield.occnc.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l6K2kOPa055104; Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:46:25 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from curtis@harbor.brookfield.occnc.com)
Message-Id: <200707200246.l6K2kOPa055104@harbor.brookfield.occnc.com>
To: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com>
Subject: Re: [RPSEC] BGP Security Requirements v08
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 19 Jul 2007 15:06:32 EDT." <p06240505c2c52c906079@[128.89.89.71]>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:46:24 -0400
X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+)
X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25
Cc: Sandy Murphy <sandy@tislabs.com>, rpsec@ietf.org, Russ White <riw@cisco.com>
X-BeenThere: rpsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: curtis@occnc.com
List-Id: Routing Protocol Security Requirements <rpsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>, <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/rpsec>
List-Post: <mailto:rpsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>, <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org

In message <p06240505c2c52c906079@[128.89.89.71]>
Stephen Kent writes:
>  
> The ROA scheme has a specific purpose, i.e., allowing a resource 
> holder to express an globally-verifiable authorization to originate a 
> route to the holder's prefix(es). ROAs ought not be criticized for 
> not doing something that they are not intended to do.
>  
> Steve


ROA should be criticized for a major ommission relative to an existing
scheme it is expecting to replace.  But we're off topic.

Curtis


_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
RPSEC@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email