IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sidrops] Indeed, we are not done yet (Was: [routing-wg] misconceptions about ROV)

Job Snijders <job@fastly.com> Tue, 22 February 2022 12:03 UTC

Return-Path: <job@fastly.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 10A313A0E92 for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 04:03:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.099 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=fastly.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 vILJ-Zf4y3GB for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 04:03:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x629.google.com (mail-ej1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::629]) (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 3E4A43A0E95 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 04:03:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x629.google.com with SMTP id p15so42079409ejc.7 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 04:03:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastly.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=51mKPuSl69p7YG3CRENQP1XnPUTe7w8IA+utfVuVVMA=; b=ljYh9owRKAecx5OO1Ys7BZ3py/USCdFqM519hrhoA2fzwv4iobvZFvf9i6VyttVPy7 BKD9PvrvmBW271QFzxUuUGoKE8SME0sQluSXssX1ETuXHal7d5HWZkavBh5whlKMunXp Yk0ylDIjvbzKYtn5XzZ5nKbDQk07nmOg5O3rI=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=51mKPuSl69p7YG3CRENQP1XnPUTe7w8IA+utfVuVVMA=; b=rkbvA9EiHYk+5p6VsiIarMHtH/o37Rjfo6xNRyPB66kJCcu83rLXfBVeDkQ9isDtVv f6fpsz8rgrioxToQARVARgdFydwkL2Y9wWrV7ADQ0EHyG7tbBwABcR65dUiEFystGPPg XSuPAwYK275zi40IPptapCRItZe11zQZHHurNcy+U01+MOyx5FjSUlu5C+gOxODob/vp tuLabbWjukVoz/EqEa98H5B9JfsKHI95U2Qu5yxe+ko4Vjavy9NIluLvRbbqrYPpKUj1 MuF66mGiOb5OqHwJHo6UZu8ZEA3NHqRypMSa92d1tCnBSYZJKxKDBqb2E2sO0z/X+3Zd WS1A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5303fbejBL9ZcJF1wThPQgOYPI9wLpnEouL7ZIWG0NUSLNZ33EIg ctB0qa86Hv5F7yJvo4koF2/qKWxFZGf1qQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz3A2jgRtJWM9UgBfupxMWvF/iMeDZXegv3BAB24IYa63qTB6A4UhQYzEUxvum/NDDBX55+7w==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:69c5:b0:6cf:d164:8b32 with SMTP id g5-20020a17090669c500b006cfd1648b32mr18986704ejs.233.1645531388973; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 04:03:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from snel ([2a10:3781:276:2:16f6:d8ff:fe47:2eb7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g22sm6233001ejk.169.2022.02.22.04.03.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 22 Feb 2022 04:03:07 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 13:03:05 +0100
From: Job Snijders <job@fastly.com>
To: Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@nlnetlabs.nl>
Cc: sidrops@ietf.org
Message-ID: <YhTQ+UQIpHAMQ8x8@snel>
References: <YhS6o18CMnvZoMMm@snel> <6D6409FA-9147-4B0E-9260-5CA2B534031B@nlnetlabs.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6D6409FA-9147-4B0E-9260-5CA2B534031B@nlnetlabs.nl>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/ErLAq_PVgVPvj4cIfBGExHSydaM>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] Indeed, we are not done yet (Was: [routing-wg] misconceptions about ROV)
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: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 12:03:16 -0000

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 12:48:02PM +0100, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
> > On 22 Feb 2022, at 11:27, Job Snijders <job=40fastly.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to encourage you (and others) to first focus on
> > implementing rudimentary support for BGPsec Router Keys "according
> > to current RFCs"
> 
> Fyi.. support for this is coming in routinator 0.11. Support can be
> added to krill as well - if there is operator demand for this.

I for one am very interested in deployment BGPsec in commercial context.
I don't run krill myself, but that's irrelevant: my IETF
standards-compliant RP implementations extract and process information
from Krill instances.

At this very moment you might be in the unfortunate position of being a
gatekeeper hindering BGPsec deployment. Between expressing skepticism
which potentially discourages others from implementing BGPsec support,
and not (yet?) having implemented it yourself in Krill, the needle won't
move itself.

Think of it this way: if Krill supports publication of BGPsec Router
Keys, suddenly the pool of people positioned to experiment with BGPsec
dramatically increases. It is entirely possible that within the krill
user community there are people who (through experimentation) discover
the value and applicability of BGPsec, and maybe even come up with ideas
neither of us forsaw.

Regards,

Job

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email