Re: [sidr] AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-10

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Wed, 04 January 2017 04:36 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 9F29F129533 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 20:36:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Q_B9IaI_Y_yG for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 20:36:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 AB78B127058 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 20:36:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1cOdJd-0007Fh-Jf; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 04:36:45 +0000
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 13:36:43 +0900
Message-ID: <m2zij7l9us.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: <167fc1b5-50b9-a240-afb7-080ab97f1805@bogus.com>
References: <1FBAD3F8-5387-47A3-9988-A49A3133490A@cisco.com> <m2d1ha2ul2.wl-randy@psg.com> <C7A005B5-7550-4B74-8C80-C32C60093CD9@cisco.com> <m21sxkwozs.wl-randy@psg.com> <m2y3zra1ns.wl-randy@psg.com> <167fc1b5-50b9-a240-afb7-080ab97f1805@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/QzRDL1_4jEi-DpU7Ohh3rv9-IFw>
Cc: sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-10
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 04 Jan 2017 04:36:49 -0000

[ side comment best ignored ]

>> otoh, private AS numbers are used in non-confed topologies, e.g. the bgp
>> stub customer who uses a private AS.  they should not sign of course.
>> but once i receive their announcement and strip the private AS,
>> can/should i sign?  i just looked at bgpsec-protocol and found no
>> guidance.
> 
> from that vantage point you are the origin. it's not clear to me that a
> customer  relationship is substantively then if you do this internal to
                                         ^ different [ i presume ]
> your org. operationally the'yre probably also registering route objects,
> issuing LOAS and operating on behalf of the private ASN.

i buy everything but the LOAs.  issues of legal authority to enter into
contracts et alia.

randy