Re: [sidr] draft-sriram-bgpsec-design-choices-00 -- IXP and Route Server

["Chris Hall" <[e-mail]>]

Sriram, Kotikalapudi wrote (on Sat 09-Jul-2011 at 00:27 +0100):
> Sandy's observations are correct.
>
...
> Section 6.6 clearly notes thus:
> "This is a private arrangement between said parties and
>  is invisible to other ASes.  Thus, this arrangement is
>  not part of the BGPSEC protocol specification."

Strictly entre nous, I don't get a strong sense from the text that
entering into such an arrangement is an obvious and foolish mistake
:-}  Unlike, for example, an ISP using its own key to proxy sign for a
customer, which is "considered a bad idea".

Chris