Re: [sidr] draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-02: Path shortening & lengthening

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Mon, 09 April 2012 07:19 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.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 59DF811E8080 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 00:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.421
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.421 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.178, 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 OngZuH5L2kYM for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 00:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1310.opentransfer.com (mail1310.opentransfer.com [76.162.254.103]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 764F711E8076 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 00:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 6015 invoked by uid 399); 9 Apr 2012 07:19:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.57?) (pbs:robert@raszuk.net@83.9.9.57) by mail1310.opentransfer.com with ESMTPM; 9 Apr 2012 07:19:10 -0000
X-Originating-IP: 83.9.9.57
Message-ID: <4F828D6D.10907@raszuk.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 09:19:09 +0200
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sidr@ietf.org
References: <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C4930B96182E71@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov>
In-Reply-To: <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C4930B96182E71@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "idr@ietf.org List" <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-02: Path shortening & lengthening
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: robert@raszuk.net
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: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 07:19:12 -0000

> Your analysis assumes that there a conventional BGP-4 AS_PATH field
> and then there is is BGPSEC_Path_Signatures from which AS path info
> can be inferred separately. This is not true in the latest BGPSEC
> update format as Matt presented it in Paris.

How an optional attribute replace well-known mandatory one ?

Sorry but for such step formal IDR WG approval is necessary if you 
choose to propose BGPSEC_Path_Signatures as mandatory attribute. This is 
major BGP protocol change.

Documentation of partial deployment is required as well as two 
interoperable implementations ;).

RFC4271:

5.1.2.  AS_PATH

    AS_PATH is a well-known mandatory attribute.  This attribute
    identifies the autonomous systems through which routing information
    carried in this UPDATE message has passed.  The components of this
    list can be AS_SETs or AS_SEQUENCEs.


draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-02.txt

    This document specifies a new optional (non-transitive) BGP path
    attribute, BGPSEC_Path_Signatures.


Best regards,
R.