Re: [sidr] various

Danny McPherson <danny@tcb.net> Sat, 12 November 2011 14:53 UTC

Return-Path: <danny@tcb.net>
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 E9C7521F8922 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 06:53:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.484
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Z0sURYqazZdZ for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 06:53:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uu.ops-netman.net (morrowc-1-pt.tunnel.tserv13.ash1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:7:36e::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 772C221F8906 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 06:53:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailserver.ops-netman.net (mailserver.ops-netman.net [208.76.12.119]) by uu.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E1BD1901A3; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:53:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [172.16.7.31] (unknown [122.147.35.3]) (Authenticated sender: danny@OPS-NETMAN.NET) by mailserver.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E0E9D320245; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:53:19 +0000 (UTC)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-15--794986012"
From: Danny McPherson <danny@tcb.net>
In-Reply-To: <m2ehxef1ob.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:53:17 -0500
Message-Id: <D1708446-41E2-4267-ABC5-4636B49FE860@tcb.net>
References: <20111031193803.30761.81234.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4EB02586.5010101@bbn.com> <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD4656937791451B2CC8D@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com> <m2ehxef1ob.wl%randy@psg.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] various
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: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:53:25 -0000

On Nov 11, 2011, at 10:40 PM, Randy Bush wrote:

> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-02
> 
>   To prevent exposure of the internals of BGP Confederations [RFC5065],
>   a BGPsec speaker which is a Member-AS of a Confederation MUST NOT not
>   sign updates sent to another Member-AS of the same Confederation.

Shouldn't supporting BGPSEC between Member-ASes of confederations be 
a requirement -- not simply ignored and out of scope? 

Particularly because of the manner in which they're used in many networks 
today for regional and topological policy and administrative boundaries?  

also, s/MUST NOT not/MUST NOT/ if it lives...

-danny