Re: [sidr] [Idr] No BGPSEC intradomain ?

"George, Wes" <wesley.george@twcable.com> Thu, 12 April 2012 12:31 UTC

Return-Path: <wesley.george@twcable.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 013F521F8663; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 05:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.385
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.385 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.078, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368]
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 mkEXY90G1kka; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 05:31:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cdpipgw02.twcable.com (cdpipgw02.twcable.com [165.237.59.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D8D21F865B; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 05:31:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.12
X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,410,1330923600"; d="scan'208";a="350188953"
Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB03.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.12]) by cdpipgw02.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 12 Apr 2012 08:31:03 -0400
Received: from PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.27]) by PRVPEXHUB03.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.12]) with mapi; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:31:45 -0400
From: "George, Wes" <wesley.george@twcable.com>
To: "idr@ietf.org List" <idr@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:31:44 -0400
Thread-Topic: [sidr] [Idr] No BGPSEC intradomain ?
Thread-Index: Ac0X9vKgDybfDBfvSGCdfgxGGidh+AAQtH5AABuNe1A=
Message-ID: <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD465693779173DCB5AEE@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com>
References: <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C4930B96182E71@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov> <4F828D6D.10907@raszuk.net> <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C4930B96C507DA@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov> <4F830E75.70606@raszuk.net> <24B20D14B2CD29478C8D5D6E9CBB29F60F6F1533@Hermes.columbia.ads.sparta.com> <4F832F5E.9030903@raszuk.net> <0BD03B75-CA3A-4CBA-BBF4-E2100AFA64E4@kumari.net> <4F846121.2050408@raszuk.net> <CAL9jLaYF-MW1cJ2n28BiV1mi+tpPS2ECKB2UxhFMQ=NXxbihCg@mail.gmail.com> <7309FCBCAE981B43ABBE69B31C8D21391B3EE03F77@EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1204111507190.22591@jamaica.dcs.gla.ac.uk> <CAL9jLaZDwpje4NtHHMUpzJaHDJLMY-f8gzDUVe3pEKwSqvsm_w@mail.gmail.com> <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD465693779173DCB5AAB@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com>
In-Reply-To: <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD465693779173DCB5AAB@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "sidr@ietf.org" <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] [Idr] No BGPSEC intradomain ?
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: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:31:59 -0000

Trying again without the signature block. Sorry about that, hit send too soon. *blush*
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sidr-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sidr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> > Christopher Morrow
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 11:23 AM
> > To: Paul Jakma
> > Cc: idr@ietf.org List; sidr@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [sidr] [Idr] No BGPSEC intradomain ?
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Paul Jakma <paul@jakma.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Jakob Heitz wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree with Robert. Today, there are many tools that interact with BGP
> > >> messages. If the AS_PATH disappears, they will all break.
> > >
> > >
> > > Indeed. If mandatory, well-known attributes are removed, then the BGP
> > > protocol version number needs to be bumped.
> > >
> > > There's near-0-cost in doing that for those interested in implementing the
> > > new functionality, and it avoids a world of hurt for all the various tools
> > > (sometimes in-house/home-grown) out there that believe they know what
> > > they're getting when the version says 4.
> >
> > "if you don't ask for the 'bgpsec capability' then ... you get what
> > you get today."
> >
> > also
> >
> > "if you ask for the 'bgpsec capabiltiy' then ... you get (and can
> > presumably handle) the changes"
> >
> > so, everything you do today, ought to just keep right on working, or
> > that's the plan.
>
> [WEG] Why *are* we so resistant to incrementing the BGP version? I think that
> there's some merit to the idea that this suite of things represents a
> significant enough change to BGP that a change in version number might be a
> cleaner way to do the capability negotiation, perhaps even incorporating other
> secondary capabilities so that there isn't so much individual capability
> negotiation for all of the things that we've tacked onto BGP4 over the years.
> In other words, if you support BGPv5, you support the a list of capabilities
> (eg 4-byte ASN, GR, route refresh, etc), and they no longer have to be
> negotiated separately. Even if we move directly from version 4 to 6 as it
> seems we are wont to do, I think this bears some consideration (by IDR, of
> course) ;-)
>
> Wes George
>
> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
> proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to
> copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for
> the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not
> the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any
> dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the
> contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender
> immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail
> and any printout.
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.