Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 10:20 PM Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Carlos M. Martinez <carlosm3011@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> hey!
>>
>> On 5/5/16 3:30 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> >     > I think it's an interesting topic to discuss, I'm a little worried
>> >     > that: "Because the third party said things are 'ok' I'll believe
>> >     > things are ok!"
>> >     >
>> >     > mostly because I don't see a clear method to ensure that 'third
>> party' has:
>> >     >   1) up-to-date information
>> >     >
>> >       Same with RTR cache server.
>> >
>> >
>> > except I run the server and can get some data about how updated/etc it
>> > is with respect to collection of roa/etc data.
>>
>> Not always. In a couple of IXs I know the RTR server is shared and is
>> provided as a service to the IXs members.
>>
>> They trust each other enough to do this, so not trusting the route
>> server would be kind of silly.
>>
>>
> sure, but I dont' always use the RS at the IX.
>
>
... and you don't have to trust the RS if you do.

This feel like a prefect being the enemy of the good type discussion --
 you shouldn't use RS, and you should do your own validation. You should
also always brush your teeth and ear yer veggies -- but, we know some
people will not listen to / follow this advice.
Some people do use route servers, and won't do their own validation - I'd
rather that they have the information available to make a decision than
not...

>
>
>> In any case, you, personally as an individual IX member, are free to
>> have any misgivings about the operational expertise of the IX and you
>> can adjust your BGP configs accordingly (de-prefing whatever you learn
>> from elbonia-ix, ignoring validation state, overwriting communities). I
>> just don't see an argument against what the draft proposes in the
>> scenario you describe.
>>
>

>
>> However, if you dis-trust a particular IX too much, maybe you just
>> should de-peer them. But we disgress :-)
>>
>
> yea, so... I didn't REALLY want to rathole the conversation. I'm
> perfectly happy if consenting adults want to do this, that's cool. I may
> not? I may in some places because I can't solve my problem other ways?
>
> I don't think bending things like this is particularly bad, as long as
> people understand what they walked into/on.
>

Yup.
W

>
>
>
>>
>> -Carlos
>>
>> PS: I loved the name Elbonia, Can I license it from you ? :-)
>>
>>
> absolutely... Elbonia and Westonia.. they are bad places, (depending on
> your perspective of course.. if you are elbonian, you dislike westonians...
> and vice/versa) :)
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sidr mailing list
>> sidr@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>>
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>