Re: [Sidrops] Comments on draft-ietf-sidrops-validating-bgp-speaker
Job Snijders <job@ntt.net> Thu, 15 February 2018 13:39 UTC
Return-Path: <job@instituut.net>
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 7DAE712DA04 for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 05:39:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 6gFOavPwQtbg for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 05:39:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com (mail-wm0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) (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 78BC912DA09 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 05:39:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f50.google.com with SMTP id j21so1213586wmh.1 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 05:39:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=yUeLVwHUVz9Kkd3IzuB0s4D8iuHTM+7paISd4IQ8oRU=; b=K/dILUClSJLlF75V4zxhh1DORxn1SNxIlrbV7H9y3IkiN8eDOEEyOSzGnuyPWxgYVN tjmabMw4T4/u9EaZ5aZnq7a7K/qOMmGNiNRHVhW3EhZG1Yh6UGgRRMx3MI1noY/TL5So IvC/DjIYl49/E834teVXk1Em3fQYTmGOeyiwf+GdfojyOx6tZ5dDN+ZzNUXPHcQWJDhK nkdx2x2L3xCg3BvutcIKjPEi5IoPrlorw6uWEHkaq99BPktCE5s+qyonCKKtph7tQUJz 8Wqamhv763j4XU/AK87qYBs9u2hOAg0A0zkraP4NPwIU87HpN0PDZLtrsLdlrIYSTnrA ZuVg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPB58KVYXTs2o5fuIGX0Jxo+d15uBFv7yoWY2Pi8HuH8XroecUXT U4vvviSMa3x3V9R/DAAbiKX3gDQvbmI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227Yr3c6dLl7XHcXZszWpkFq+DOi9La1bAuujJkz0tFdY3ATUJBf5CkApwYjaKjguHr1VR7VIQ==
X-Received: by 10.80.153.143 with SMTP id m15mr3352317edb.145.1518701973775; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 05:39:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([2001:67c:208c:10:2cf2:185e:db44:f1cb]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p55sm7604112edc.15.2018.02.15.05.39.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 15 Feb 2018 05:39:32 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 14:39:31 +0100
From: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>
To: Aris Lambrianidis <aris.lambrianidis@ams-ix.net>
Cc: Jeff Wheeler <jsw@inconcepts.biz>, sidrops@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180215133931.GB1193@hanna.meerval.net>
References: <CAPWAtbJJ3mWXP-d314CbY7n9LSh4KmNjXBCP93Ag_i=0gcAd8Q@mail.gmail.com> <5A84B6B8.50207@ams-ix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5A84B6B8.50207@ams-ix.net>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/F_tekILJ7AHww6_5-aUuESuEIfA>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] Comments on draft-ietf-sidrops-validating-bgp-speaker
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 13:39:37 -0000
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:22:48PM +0100, Aris Lambrianidis wrote: > Let me also point out that in theory, forwarding "invalid" prefixes is > bad. However, our own operational experience so far has shown that > most ROA invalid prefixes are due to misconfiguration rather than > malicious intent. A major consideration is that all IXP route servers only offer a _partial_ view on the global routing table, nobody ever single-homes behind an IXP route server. So, if the IXP route server does _not_ propagate invalid prefixes to its participants, operationally speaking the 'worst' thing that can happen is that alternative paths are used via either bilateral peering or other arrangements. If anything, if people depend on keeping their traffic on the IX with the help of the RS, there is an actual monetary incentive to repair the misconfigured ROAs. If anything, IXPs should take a leading role in deploying RPKI Origin Validation - this draft proposes the opposite: a watering down that justifies propagation of bad announcements. By merely tagging the invalid prefixes with a community, the sender of those BGP announcements has significantly visiblity into problem, since the sender of such announcements won't see the 'invalid community' themselves. I think in context of IXP Route Servers it is very detrimental to the Internet community's overall effort to improve routing security if invalid malicious announcements are distributed alongside these 'misconfigurations', and the propagation of misconfigurations is deemed more important than blocking of incorrect announcements. Given the prevalence of routing incidents and the critical effects they have on business continuity, I'm concerned that time is wasted on actively lowering the bar ('rpki-light' aka 'draft-ietf-sidrops-validating-bgp-speaker') rather than spending time on setting higher standards. ESPECIALLY given the position of route servers in the routing ecosystem. If we consider a misconfigured RPKI ROA an 'error', favoring strict error handling (dropping) over attempting error recovery is an effective technique for ensuring that faults receive attention. Kind regards, Job
- [Sidrops] Comments on draft-ietf-sidrops-validati… Jeff Wheeler
- Re: [Sidrops] Comments on draft-ietf-sidrops-vali… Aris Lambrianidis
- Re: [Sidrops] Comments on draft-ietf-sidrops-vali… Job Snijders
- Re: [Sidrops] Comments on draft-ietf-sidrops-vali… Job Snijders
- Re: [Sidrops] Comments on draft-ietf-sidrops-vali… Jeff Wheeler
- Re: [Sidrops] Comments on draft-ietf-sidrops-vali… Nick Hilliard