IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com> Fri, 09 December 2016 21:51 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana@cisco.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 79D1C12955B for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 13:51:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.417
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.417 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 aoqVPk88VNqv for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 13:51:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B619D1294AB for <sidr@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 13:51:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6660; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1481320298; x=1482529898; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=omfjjHDm2MFoNSY87ZZ8XmTvdfuOxkmd50uerp7eb14=; b=LSW5LJhlaSc65Ml8mWK24Ymai80Vxg6s1Xy23TvhbjStJDmcTrd4AFQB Z3nPV84R5ByVnP2vD0SV30Ywc9x+2XgxR142MYVPcu4hUDCaHHIX8ouZU BpVVh7B9hj0RC0YKiel36GWhGGtfRJGtyXEXPM8R1mbcdvkoCDqQ99v1/ o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BsAQBqJktY/51dJa1dGgEBAQECAQEBAQgBAQEBgnNEAQEBAQEfWoEGB41CpnOFIoIKhiECGoFMPxQBAgEBAQEBAQFiKIRpBiNWEAIBCD8DAgICMBQRAgQOBYhrqxKCKS+KbwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAR2GPoF9gl6HTC2CMAWVAIVrAZEgkEWSGAEfN4EhMgEBhSVyhhoFgSuBDQEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,325,1477958400"; d="scan'208,217";a="357063184"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Dec 2016 21:51:37 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uB9LpbQq021353 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 9 Dec 2016 21:51:37 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 15:51:37 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 15:51:37 -0600
From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Thread-Topic: AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-10
Thread-Index: AQHSNR62bJsPySrh80ivtkDVsKGkYKD8P1SAgAFW4YCAAw9tgA==
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 21:51:37 +0000
Message-ID: <626EE1F7-878E-453A-A33B-DAAC21907261@cisco.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>
In-Reply-To: <m2y3zra1ns.wl-randy@psg.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1a.0.160910
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.86.249.235]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_626EE1F7878E453AA33BDAAC21907261ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/oV3bHp161ZxucPNnhJacpDF5u38>
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: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 21:51:40 -0000

Hi!

Yes, there should be something about private ASNs in the protocol spec.

It would be nice to also see some operational guidance in this document.

Alvaro.

On 12/7/16, 7:07 PM, "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com<mailto:randy@psg.com>> wrote:

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.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email