[Sidrops] RRDP / RSYNC / Other?

Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com> Fri, 12 January 2024 03:53 UTC

Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@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 85BB4C14F6BE; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 19:53:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] 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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rv2mfkDCWv2z; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 19:53:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C076C14F6B6; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 19:53:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com with SMTP id ada2fe7eead31-467e862de61so1083669137.3; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 19:53:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1705031586; x=1705636386; darn=ietf.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=b6yNBegWV3eXsdnha60cpqIxK356y+eSx7w4PxFdBKI=; b=TDHSyQi4wEKVUooMHnaKIeybMj0uwe2zuQ+JGY/mFDunRINdO5fzIXVUATIZhbnHan omr9iEqJ1baQm5Boi/4EnVUFxK7jCWmQZE21xjeKs6VoL9K7HQx2tUYmS3hw3ZhjHdu0 6zwo58KcuLD1u38SCr5xiGtyTmay5FqBu7JDQp9qZOufKCV2OxaDOtGh5AL5rLH4DvfF z/hzFV4OcT2IFsTKXFbjeoCSCtwiEw2SPUqof5AGP50JavthG0HB1YJSGX9kY6+XEPPC /mtW3OK9bzySrRe1o6QvfJyZozMBqd/Id3uZ01UUAWCRHgLzG+C+VKLoIjPCzS+SV3Zl 2kUg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1705031586; x=1705636386; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=b6yNBegWV3eXsdnha60cpqIxK356y+eSx7w4PxFdBKI=; b=nPXkgZ1xQlsvTh0M5Uy+lHqw40I6NuS7jnZmAzwcu1F4SsoVacHH0oCJfb7w/tHXgO sPAvqfedjc6NPPQnEmkbAJgwcAQ+aHUg5zJm/qwskAAC3AW+3e1sDTPgPe8CA6olsWI4 Bfwqdjvw8HSyeGsrKLoKeo2t1OJLkYMHt0nuHPoQ4Xz2XyZfAuCdph3jIi2vMWCQcWVP l0ek3jqWbuA/2y/tZxG34azKnRB0HAx4kWN99Qt/GCIFpyVcTDds98QtamOGbsYhu13S 86eT+t7OS+JKdquV7NbEDfjd7VfgES10pDk06Bu8W6lFDniI2OefnjskitXLheD0w513 bEsw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzTj1DucFEQgzzBEXuZqbjVIlTp/pa8ZjtUHN/QdMFS7o5ogfvJ pmBpVEysPUYHQw1ST9AeRl79FfATdUbUsntEnkC/1oyl
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHMGW8LxqD5MOXErbGnaqTBb27QeOIW9SZh+q0I9Ra1iK8i3N3Tdn3fgCjr8ZwhBnr1z5TD9wYNAZHfvLkPNhk=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:5110:b0:468:106d:2582 with SMTP id bm16-20020a056102511000b00468106d2582mr801395vsb.31.1705031585824; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 19:53:05 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 22:52:55 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL9jLab1xknRY=oCZzyXe7Dtyc8to46rVfE-1BzzuMUkWCNtLg@mail.gmail.com>
To: SIDR Operations WG <sidrops@ietf.org>, sidrops-ads@ietf.org, SIDROps Chairs <sidrops-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/PopU-1_-enUbBBndnIaNg7qPawA>
Subject: [Sidrops] RRDP / RSYNC / Other?
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 03:53:07 -0000

Howdy WG folks,
The 'prefer rrdp' draft has been sitting(expired)  for a while, I had
thought when the document started life there was a set of good reasons
for this plan. I think I still want to prefer 'not rsync' on my RP
deployment :)

I believe that a longer term goal for rrdp (and the draft in question)
was to eventually decommission/deprecate the RSYNC code paths, as
well.

In light of the original reasonings for RRDP development:
  * standard(ized) transport protocol (http)
  * scalability and cacheability of the content
  * easier to inspect/debug service(s)
  (there may be others,  don't think right now its important that there are)

and the original arguments against RSYNC as the protocol for long term use:
  * how could this possibly scale!
  * i can ship random bits  to all RPs and they can't NOT accept them
  * wow is this a bear to deal with in a programmatic manner!
  (there may be others, not important right now what they are)

Is it time that we fresh-slate thought about this problem?
I believe we CAN swap in 'anything' that has a URL type naming/pointing form
  (perhaps we would need to define new url protocols, but...)
I think if we had a solid option, with running code we could talk
about removing rsync, preferring rrdp and testing the 'new thing'...
or some form of that ordering.

Should we take up a discussion and work to investigate a RRDP replacement?

-chris