IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sidrops] [routing-wg] misconceptions about ROV

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Tue, 22 February 2022 01:19 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.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 038F03A0A1E for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 17:19:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 1bdECnsFSh0b for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 17:19:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FA833A08C6 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 17:19:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1nMJqA-000E60-Gi; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 01:19:42 +0000
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 17:19:41 -0800
Message-ID: <m28ru3ofyq.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Di Ma <madi@juicybun.cn>
Cc: SIDR Operations WG <sidrops@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <7FBC2063-2404-4BF9-836E-210629C4BA63@juicybun.cn>
References: <m2h78roqbp.wl-randy@psg.com> <7FBC2063-2404-4BF9-836E-210629C4BA63@juicybun.cn>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/NqTNLnzScix6D7lA2KNdjA_5r8U>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] [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 01:19:51 -0000

di:

> I don’t care the way we/they see ROV but the way we use it.
> 
> ROV is good as long as it can remedy accidental misconfigurations that
> bring about routing security problem/catastrophe.
> 
> If someone doesn't think ROV is not a security mechanism from
> cryptography perspective, I settle for that.

operationally, it is trivial to subvert/attack ROV; and that has
nothing to do with the cryptography.  it's simple net ops.

randy

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email