Re: [Sidrops] question on draft-ietf-sidrops-aspa-verification-04

Alexander Azimov <a.e.azimov@gmail.com> Sat, 02 May 2020 19:01 UTC

Return-Path: <a.e.azimov@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3C3E3A17F7 for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 May 2020 12:01:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 GE1EGtMUkpVd for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 May 2020 12:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb36.google.com (mail-yb1-xb36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C14D3A17F6 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 May 2020 12:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb36.google.com with SMTP id o198so6809138ybg.10 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 May 2020 12:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9FJemeQstTsnqZJx8Fh8aW7Lpj4CZxaA6lALVz2WhB4=; b=o3ClUHdED1DGrs0j7IAOnw6fQBfk5tfsKF3LtMWaaYW0KXKPQjc8hIITO+vbqT+KYY +BTcX8oy2atnsnenb7fPoOlcBIyjkWsZoqxfuetL76PT2Q4abCCkfuPsMm1QDge52Hu+ s56rlfernCe01/anLCBB1KfnyKEn59oydo85KQVC1RplGlXbx+IPtnhhGxb/J3FgAKmf uiJaBUMa7abO/bI5swk0RPJgFAlKj/BpY8fgR9jfriNoHy7OvPhKJhH1mHxtctLzk4EV w75Jp57t/PqmlTS7Eeyv0QCQ/F5/K68nkU7F/lxa3yndjliRKwytF2UfGhB23E7riGwJ KLPg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9FJemeQstTsnqZJx8Fh8aW7Lpj4CZxaA6lALVz2WhB4=; b=djUPti1mBroig885kY6DDPBqqNRkauXeGLXHXFlEaVyb0T8MNKfJqJS255YB3Uv6EE VKYYo/oIOo0qyq4tAe5AQHX7zk8gWGxEfbSUcB85iOqpyxCR1Q4sWi/aeZ3NSlJy51Rp xhce1Elw4UZHR2T1KbIOS+JaqTAsF/MjUY8iENZzPz626aL8sT/bhmZCosYsEl3i2zjJ M6c8xKybdl4akAisgyzhRDvJPcvxb7HeThnt98VwOQvr9OexEHMy5hJJVi+Ub4oemiq2 M4oeKoCpAK7jyyUcaZ3K5CDLelPP7ykZQD5Ho/4ggnwgWZ1rXuVzIuM4f0hzeTSptHGL 4N/w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYYOGSNFS9jF52UT3lRzVtmJZ8XhpQeCX9qgSi4PwH7sT7ukl9e tJL+JPUVT1oSIi7CHsNGXyUVl1bvKuVCmc8eomqYZ9/H
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLVFyEHFbachIp2R3i5d0DA8/5BGpv83+tBsDAtDys+BNz0jRgPooKzprl0dgOqEjp4r8OpPW/M7GFgeQ5XPvQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1e43:: with SMTP id e3mr8678329otj.248.1588445678709; Sat, 02 May 2020 11:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <C01B0098369B2D4391851938DA6700B7179F9EAB@dggeml512-mbs.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <C01B0098369B2D4391851938DA6700B7179F9EAB@dggeml512-mbs.china.huawei.com>
From: Alexander Azimov <a.e.azimov@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 21:54:27 +0300
Message-ID: <CAEGSd=APMCnnd5mrnMKtti-QWy1m7r5JfJsf7HynZqyXWwsZHg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Guyunan (Yunan Gu, IP Technology Research Dept. NW)" <guyunan@huawei.com>
Cc: "rv@nic.dtag.de" <rv@nic.dtag.de>, SIDR Operations WG <sidrops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="0000000000006d448305a4aed48e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/4H65jn5OeQy8nCeAM0sFmgz-iAA>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] question on draft-ietf-sidrops-aspa-verification-04
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 May 2020 19:01:55 -0000

Hi Yunan,

Let say that that AS1 is the originator of the prefix, and has created ASPA
records. Since AS2 is a peer it will not be included in the list of
providers. The AS2 isn't creating any records + making the leak and AS3 is
performing ASPA verification procedure.
The 5.1 says:

   When a route is received from a customer, a literal peer, or by a RS
   at an IX, each pair (AS(I-1), AS(I)) MUST belong to customer-provider
   or sibling relationship


In our case, AS3 needs to check that AS1 -> AS2 belongs to c2p pairs. It
will check the existence of ASPA record for AS1 - it is present, then it
will check the presence of AS2 in the list - it will not be there, thus
making the path invalid.

Let me know if you have further questions.

ср, 29 апр. 2020 г. в 05:21, Guyunan (Yunan Gu, IP Technology Research
Dept. NW) <guyunan@huawei.com>om>:

> Hi Alex and Ruediger,
>
>
>
> To continue our discussion at the meeting, let’s use the example you
> provided yesterday. Both lateral peering between AS1—AS2, and AS2—AS3.
>
>
>
> First question, does AS1 or AS2 sign any ASPA object for this pair and
> how?  I see description for Sibling relation representation in Section 7,
> but haven’t been able to find any for P2P.
>
>
>
> Second question, if yes to the above question, how does AS 3 use any of
> the ASPA object(s) to detect the leak? And if no, how to detect the leak
> anyway?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Yunan
>
>
>
> [image: 10.1.1.0/24]
> [image: AS 1] [image: AS 2,AS 3]
>
>
>

-- 
Best regards,
Alexander Azimov