IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sidrops] [WGLC] draft-ietf-sidrops-roa-considerations-01 - Ends 10/March/2022

Ties de Kock <tdekock@ripe.net> Thu, 10 March 2022 11:57 UTC

Return-Path: <tdekock@ripe.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 96EC93A0D12 for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 03:57:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.109 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ripe.net
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 MYsQjav_mt-R for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 03:57:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from molamola.ripe.net (molamola.ripe.net [IPv6:2001:67c:2e8:11::c100:1371]) (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 86E713A0D54 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 03:57:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ripe.net; s=s1-ripe-net; h=To:Message-Id:Cc:Date:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type ; bh=cmEDTyvBrU/x/Ph/iaG9OCT4v2NiiwfnfkTYJWKwwOc=; b=q52Bjz/rkVL8P7hWQx9evlWU qqUW+0OCEnoFKorGWysgbK04Z6zBzzRdijfffdtUSmlPSrHTdXT7b3HbviLd8C+OLG2/SmzpV9HP1 VU+HJkho0rnzsMrK5e3/0C2DuLIwZNrcm8VCOCkGwkbZDsKgOiZuVO8FawoW8vCnrM031daLSpeio rHJAO+On41Xm6ui7wkQg+e+pJgqhPnUebRVhAxvnlogrhioqUqQN4gYEdMnvNb4VgSdE5a8lwa2ET YkH7jdcRwdg0Q5szfDYNp8GYLSMEAsLwp6p0rLuMuNELqIfSS+Lti1ywEhHo/W2/fC5GxKe9KvTpF 6CEal6U+tw==;
Received: from allealle.ripe.net ([2001:67c:2e8:23::c100:170c]:53112) by molamola.ripe.net with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <tdekock@ripe.net>) id 1nSHQG-000BEY-QY; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 12:57:36 +0100
Received: from sslvpn.ipv6.ripe.net ([2001:67c:2e8:9::c100:14e6] helo=smtpclient.apple) by allealle.ripe.net with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <tdekock@ripe.net>) id 1nSHQG-0004wh-Ly; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 12:57:36 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\))
From: Ties de Kock <tdekock@ripe.net>
In-Reply-To: <m2v8wm8278.wl-randy@psg.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 12:57:35 +0100
Cc: "sidrops@ietf.org" <sidrops@ietf.org>, Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@nlnetlabs.nl>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8961B085-5022-49C8-8775-77031B3DD814@ripe.net>
References: <BYAPR18MB26961DE9F15501CCA12ECCF1C13D9@BYAPR18MB2696.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> <851649A5-9075-4956-8B57-E51F612DF6BD@nlnetlabs.nl> <m235jqa2fk.wl-randy@psg.com> <D46FDA88-15E2-4EC6-BE07-0A1A93038B64@ripe.net> <m2v8wm8278.wl-randy@psg.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.60.0.1.1)
X-RIPE-Signature: 059faafd1cc22ebb05e1592c815fe1e1bc0e2a6e766c698603e6e2f63bc1e25f
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/kOv2tZ2AiYoFXxp_gHCzpL5pguk>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] [WGLC] draft-ietf-sidrops-roa-considerations-01 - Ends 10/March/2022
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: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 11:57:45 -0000

> On 10 Mar 2022, at 12:41, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> 
> maybe i just don't get it.
> 
> the CA, in some thought of saving bandwidth or something, packs data
> up into AS-based blobs which the RPs are then supposed to unpack and
> reconcile.  where's the win that is worth all that work?

“less objects, smaller”

It sounds like an attractive optimisation on paper.

I would need benchmark results (with a rir-sized repo with 1-vrp-one-ROA) to see
how much it does in practice.

> and i do not see the RPKI data as having epochs, times when it is
> stable.  times when there is a complete snapshot of the data.  data
> are being added and removed asynchronously in the distributed tree
> cross the net topology.  like bgp, it does not converge to a stable
> point; it is constantly in motion.

My mental model: The RPKI is a directed rooted forest. From a single point of
view, for all CAs, you see a consistent snapshot for a CA (or encounter a failed
fetch).

If there are no split views on the repository content, RPs will eventually see
the same updates.

If a CA shows an intermediate state where part of the VRPs are missing, some RPs
will see that state until their next update.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email