On 10/11/21 11:33 AM, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
Wrt BGPSec.. I am actually very happy to see that so many people are in favor of
supporting it. I hope that router vendors are watching. To the best of my
knowledge
BGPSec has only been implemented in Bird and Quagga. The main value of
supporting
BGP
in the long run, the number of routers which might have individual keys
may be on the order of the number of prefixes. we are still learning
about fragmentation as v4 use matures. i am not worried about storing
the full key set on a validating router. i am worried about crypto load
on validating
On Mon, 11 Oct 2021 at 12:29, Randy Bush wrote:
> > ASPA is orthogonal to BGPSec. It lets AS holders declare who their
> upstreams are
> > (in the context of BGP Path, not business relation). Even if this
> information is
> > not yet used in routers in an automated way, a clear text validated
> o
> ASPA without BGPsec is barely different to RPSL. Yes, I am squinting very
> hard to make that conclusion
indeed. my old eyes can not make it.
> RIPE NCC may have substantial resources, but they are applied sequentially.
> Perhaps
> RIPE NCC can shed a light on the effort involved, but I suspect it's more than
> we might think.
>
> In that context, I am not against BGPSec as such, there are just things that I
> would like to see first:
On Mon, 11 Oct 2021 at 11:52, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
> > On 11 Oct 2021, at 12:45, Matthew Walster wrote:
> >
> > I genuinely don't understand the reason for obstruction here, what am I
> missing?
>
> Perhaps this sentence could have made clear that I am not 'obstructing':
>
My apologies if I'
> On 11 Oct 2021, at 12:45, Matthew Walster wrote:
>
> I genuinely don't understand the reason for obstruction here, what am I
> missing?
Perhaps this sentence could have made clear that I am not 'obstructing':
"In that context, I am not against BGPSec as such, there are just things that
On Mon, 11 Oct 2021 at 10:33, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
> ASPA is orthogonal to BGPSec. It lets AS holders declare who their
> upstreams are
> (in the context of BGP Path, not business relation). Even if this
> information is
> not yet used in routers in an automated way, a clear text validated outp
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 11:33:40AM +0200, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
> Why now?
There are published RFC and running code. Time for the next step.
> RIPE NCC may have substantial resources, but they are applied
> sequentially. Perhaps RIPE NCC can shed a light on the effort
> involved, but I suspect i
Dear colleagues,
In this guest post on RIPE Labs, Francesco Ferreri introduces IRRHound, a new
package from Namex for tracking routing resources across multiple IRR sources:
https://labs.ripe.net/author/francesco-ferreri/hunting-routing-resources-with-irrhound/
Kind regards,
Alun Davies
RIPE L
> On 9 Oct 2021, at 11:13, Marco Marzetti wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Erik is right. BGPSec was definitely ahead of time when the IETF started
> working on it and many have marked it as bleeding edge for good reasons.The
> technologies required to support it in the wild weren't just there back th
11 matches
Mail list logo
