On Jan 25, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Danny McPherson wrote: > I just don't like the notion of deploying a brand new system with data that > at the end of the day is going to look an awful lot like the existing > in-addr.arpa delegation system that's deployed, and introduce new > hierarchical shared dependencies that don't exist today.
Right - so, the macro point here is that in order to make use of rPKI so as to ensure the integrity of the global routing system, the presupposition is that there's already sufficient integrity in said routing global system for the rPKI tree to be successfully walked in the first place, given that it's all in-band, right? And since it's all in-band, anyways, with the recursive dependencies that implies, why not make use of another, pre-existing inband hierarchical system which is explicitly designed to ensure the integrity of its answers, and which is already in the initial stages of its deployment - i.e., DNSSEC? Note I'm not advocating this position, per se, just being sure I understand the argument for purposes of discussion. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Roland Dobbins <rdobb...@arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> Most software today is very much like an Egyptian pyramid, with millions of bricks piled on top of each other, with no structural integrity, but just done by brute force and thousands of slaves. -- Alan Kay
