From nobody Thu Sep 23 10:45:15 2021 Return-Path: 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 6A2593A153C for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 10:45:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 gcXB5AcnY_SU for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 10:45:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) (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 517123A1516 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 10:45:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id d8so6955394qtd.5 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 10:45:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=bzapVqQhKg0CD77ekzRZcHoRIBQRW2E9GKk9vTK/Yes=; b=PdlEDQCpgZtBeakGsPfKEJ347pG6m8MQYCDSlKXbzUPfcPEXaj5O2a35O/RNis3BLJ 0L8nwLKmYG1kvIpwKYn66zO6A8a822QcmFEd6j8VZaVoOw3eyx4u18cy3JocM6BoKE3H usWgOPNsKrHJme9IQqeUIseASxRt2c7Sj+rQIPLVL8GMPzDtLg2eBj3gGPlKWt//Ow3T oKLCXyKr00sknVG5EKrgIf3fFySV/HB3P46KSr2MStyXsFh03fAwQmHcg5VbQ8oQ/lW0 Aa0dPup4vRyAolzmb+Dqk6y9nTTGxicOefopQzFyczwbwrVA1bUrpm7vKMmUt3QaOR/v /tLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bzapVqQhKg0CD77ekzRZcHoRIBQRW2E9GKk9vTK/Yes=; b=bGvj2GzvUGFSsMDNi4B4QVvs3nfshDnrSDwwNRdqh9cTKUiMJriAJtIBb5F+/WdHob qBeRFIalQ2C0NzCcjrihNY2GezBs70QUqeYEY+Vk2x5YN+Hrcz2TV9EJ0oFRPUFKqD8V nM5sNlTqC22ff+TItvU1DBO/7rcCbTyNzhRuabXhCQdhZXnIjO3bwqPAD4YX641wrPcL 2GEIk6JS4xLAYkRsG/boasodFjfc4BEqjD1f81ax37z3QChtKDyach+H3ARJGTsU4KLK xukAtkLmxi34et4QzN+fc+b3q/b0t3ulIqlvDgXZLm8d5i4QR8aGXM4C3kWN4zJ9rTZl jMPA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Msrv5IqXw29wmtvAVhu7jvWyRyZyWYsheARqXwoe6RGGGPuXS ZCgCdJxKxa88IoyhYExJprI7TLWkTIKTU+1JyedgRriiSjk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxhV2Kpv37VTC5pGhq7I8vGj1j57PfmDrBUsskn6ENQfVE4s6Jpky15cUArrKtMPgLYcnUcuOZHrLBZmO5TBJQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:648:: with SMTP id a8mr5934402qtb.390.1632419104848; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 10:45:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <278925A4-91B9-4B8F-B4CC-6F72B77462B3@rpstir.net> In-Reply-To: <278925A4-91B9-4B8F-B4CC-6F72B77462B3@rpstir.net> From: Christopher Morrow Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:44:54 -0400 Message-ID: To: Di Ma Cc: George Michaelson , "sidrops@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000de815c05ccad307c" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] draft-sidrops-rpkimaxlen X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 17:45:11 -0000 --000000000000de815c05ccad307c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Howdy draft authors/readers-of-drafts: "This document seems to have petered out, and I think the end of the thread here is: 'Meh, maybe we don't need this document?'" Is this document not necessary anymore? or is the document ready for wglc ? or ? On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:15 AM Di Ma wrote: > Interesting. > > AS0 ROA is yet another thing we can take into consideration. > > Di > > > 2021=E5=B9=B43=E6=9C=8811=E6=97=A5 23:07=EF=BC=8CGeorge Michaelson =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > > > > Is there a role for use of AS0 ROA, to "punch out" the elements > > between /len and /maxlen, that are not "wanted" in routing? > > > > Is there a role for short-life AS0 ROA, to mark the "emergency use" > > more specifics, So they can come live on the time for the AS0 to die > > out or be repudiated, but not have to be announced until needed? > > > > (C/F Randy: George: stop inventing things we don't need) also (C/F > > this may not actually be a new thought bubble)\ > > > > -G > > > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 5:34 PM Di Ma wrote: > >> > >> Jakob, > >> > >>> 2021=E5=B9=B43=E6=9C=8810=E6=97=A5 21:07=EF=BC=8CJakob Heitz (jheitz)= 40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > >>> > >>> I agree that a hijack is made easier when a ROA exists without a > corresponding BGP advertisement. > >>> > >>> Implementing DDOS and RTBH as indicated in the draft is difficult > without the ROAs for the required BGP announcements. As indicated in the > draft, creating and distributing the ROAs required for RTBH and DDOS > scrubbers is time consuming. > >>> > >>> Note that these ROAs are not required throughout the entire BGP space= , > the world. > >>> These ROAs are only needed near the AS requiring these services, thus > distributing them > >>> around the entire world, just for some local RTBH implementation is > disruptive to the > >>> rest of the world. > >>> > >>> To help with these "limited distribution ROAs" that are required > quickly, and in > >>> a smaller space than the entire BGP space, I propose to invent a new > BGP address > >>> family to publish them. Using BGP to publish a ROA enables fast > distribution > >>> and allows to limit the distribution to only those ASes that need it. > >> > >> As I am maintaining RPSTIR the RP Software, I have been working on a > feedback mechanism to enable RP to learn from BGP announcements to > establish local/neighbor view. In the context of RPKI, I see those ASes > sharing the same one RP are local. > >> > >> I think your proposed "limited distribution ROAs=E2=80=9D is going to= help > create local/neighbor view. > >> > >> Granted, we may have the ROA validation by RP not the router itself an= d > should work on the interface between them. > >> > >>> > >>> Anybody want to help me write a draft? > >> > >> Count me in if you think an RP implementor can help. > >> > >> Di > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sidrops mailing list > >> Sidrops@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sidrops mailing list > > Sidrops@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops > > _______________________________________________ > Sidrops mailing list > Sidrops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops > --000000000000de815c05ccad307c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Howdy draft authors/readers-of-drafts:
=C2=A0 "Thi= s document seems to have petered out, and I think the end of the thread her= e is: 'Meh, maybe we don't need this document?'"

<= /div>
Is this document not necessary anymore? or is the document ready = for wglc ? or ?

On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:15 AM Di Ma <madi@rpstir.net> wrote:
Interesting.

AS0 ROA is yet another thing we can take into consideration.

Di

> 2021=E5=B9=B43=E6=9C=8811=E6=97=A5 23:07=EF=BC=8CGeorge Michaelson <= ;ggm@algebras.org= > =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
>
> Is there a role for use of AS0 ROA, to "punch out" the eleme= nts
> between /len and /maxlen, that are not "wanted" in routing?<= br> >
> Is there a role for short-life AS0 ROA, to mark the "emergency us= e"
> more specifics, So they can come live on the time for the AS0 to die > out or be repudiated, but not have to be announced until needed?
>
> (C/F Randy: George: stop inventing things we don't need) also (C/F=
> this may not actually be a new thought bubble)\
>
> -G
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 5:34 PM Di Ma <madi@rpstir.net> wrote:
>>
>> Jakob,
>>
>>> 2021=E5=B9=B43=E6=9C=8810=E6=97=A5 21:07=EF=BC=8CJakob Heitz (= jheitz) <jheitz=3D40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A<= br> >>>
>>> I agree that a hijack is made easier when a ROA exists without= a corresponding BGP advertisement.
>>>
>>> Implementing DDOS and RTBH as indicated in the draft is diffic= ult without the ROAs for the required BGP announcements. As indicated in th= e draft, creating and distributing the ROAs required for RTBH and DDOS scru= bbers is time consuming.
>>>
>>> Note that these ROAs are not required throughout the entire BG= P space, the world.
>>> These ROAs are only needed near the AS requiring these service= s, thus distributing them
>>> around the entire world, just for some local RTBH implementati= on is disruptive to the
>>> rest of the world.
>>>
>>> To help with these "limited distribution ROAs" that = are required quickly, and in
>>> a smaller space than the entire BGP space, I propose to invent= a new BGP address
>>> family to publish them. Using BGP to publish a ROA enables fas= t distribution
>>> and allows to limit the distribution to only those ASes that n= eed it.
>>
>> As I am maintaining RPSTIR the RP Software, I have been working on= a feedback mechanism to enable RP to learn from BGP announcements to estab= lish local/neighbor view. In the context of RPKI, I see those ASes sharing = the same one RP are local.
>>
>> I think your proposed "limited distribution ROAs=E2=80=9D=C2= =A0 is going to help create local/neighbor view.
>>
>> Granted, we may have the ROA validation by RP not the router itsel= f and should work on the interface between them.
>>
>>>
>>> Anybody want to help me write a draft?
>>
>> Count me in if you think an RP implementor can help.
>>
>> Di
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sidrops mailing list
>> Sidrops@ietf= .org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops<= /a>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sidrops mailing list
> Sidrops@ietf.org=
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops<= br>
_______________________________________________
Sidrops mailing list
Sidrops@ietf.org<= br> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops
--000000000000de815c05ccad307c--