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

Randy,

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.

Di

> 2022年2月22日 05:35，Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> 写道：
> 
> i should not have to say this, but ...
> 
> 
> From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
> Subject: [routing-wg] misconceptions about ROV
> To: RIPE Routing WG <routing-wg@ripe.net>
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:13:00 -0800
> 
> lately, i am getting flak about ROV not providing protection from
> this or that malicious attack.  indeed it does not.
> 
> in the ROV design, we DELIBERATELY did NOT try to cover malicious
> attacks.  we also did not try to solve world hunger.
> 
> repeat 20 times: "ROV is not a security mechanism.  it is only meant
> to ameliorate accidental misconfigurations."
> 
> yes, a screwdriver sucks as a hammer.
> 
> we do seem to see that route mis-originations are propagating less
> widely; and presume this is due to ROV, especially in top tier
> providers.  this is good.
> 
> and once more for good luck: "ROV is not a security mechanism.  it
> is only meant to ameliorate accidental misconfigurations."
> 
> randy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sidrops mailing list
> Sidrops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops
> 