Re: [Sidrops] [GROW] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidrops-route-server-rpki-light-00.txt

[Nick Hilliard <[e-mail]>]

Matthias Waehlisch wrote:
> the current discussion makes clear that documentation of 
> origin-validation-signaling in IXP context is needed

rpki is conceptually no different to any other type of signaling
mechanism: it's simply another input into the BGP decision engine
process, just like communities or meds or as-path.

What we're losing sight of here is that it's the route server which
calculates the best path for each route using the routing decision
engine, and then sends a _single_ best path to the client. Conceptually,
it doesn't matter whether the tie-breaker on the route server is
communities, meds, as-path or rpki: the point is that the policy
decision mechanism needs to be configured on the route server itself,
because the route server is the device which is calculating the best
path.  If the route server operator doesn't do this, the clients will
end up with path hiding (see 2.3.1 in rfc7947).  I.e. it's nothing
specific to rpki.

This is already extensively documented in rfc7947 and rfc7948.

Nick