Re: [sidr] docco changes from minutes

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Wed, 23 May 2012 13:51 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D49FD21F84FB for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 May 2012 06:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.37
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.37 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.229, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q5RWYi+fA2g6 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 May 2012 06:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79B1521F847F for <sidr@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 May 2012 06:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1SXBy2-000DgN-9L; Wed, 23 May 2012 13:51:10 +0000
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 22:51:09 +0900
Message-ID: <m2k4039faq.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: "George, Wes" <wesley.george@twcable.com>
In-Reply-To: <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD46569377917426C5678@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com>
References: <m262bn7qv4.wl%randy@psg.com> <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD46569377917426C5678@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Cc: sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] docco changes from minutes
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 13:51:12 -0000

> Send Randy text about *why* you should drop invalid

i actually understand this.  it's the jgs paris aha.  thanks!

if you have a roa
   10.0.0.0/16-24  42
and you get announcements
   10.0.0.0/16     42
   10.0.666.0/24  666
if you do not drop the invalid 10.0.666.0/24, then longest match will
send packets to 666

>         Origin ops/ BGP Sec ops
>         Text - Deploy (upgrade code),
>         apply policy just to tag with a community,
>         then do analysis to ensure it's doing what you expect,
>         then deploy policy to actually do things like drop invalid,
>         prefer valid over unknown, etc." 

this i do not follow.

> The latter looks to me like a deployment guideline to address the
> concerns that I think Brian brought up about OV/BGPSec potentially
> creating non-trivial changes to routing during deployment. I can flesh
> that text out a bit if people agree that it's useful to add.

i think i covered that with the new traffic paragraph.

thanks!!!

randy