Jared,

See below.

On Feb 11, 2011, at 14:02 MST, Jared Mauch wrote:
[--snip--]
> I don't necessarily trust anyone in this arena.  There's a lot of potential 
> for harm.  I don't want my routers to require on some external device.  You 
> may be willing to live with that, but I can not.

In fact, I would say my network is the complete opposite.  :-)  I already 
depend on external COTS servers for a variety of mission critical functions in 
the network: IRR, DNS, Netflow collection/processing, SNMP stats, syslog 
messages, syslog processing, etc.  (I would be shocked if other networks don't 
have similar requirements for external COTS servers).


> I can not allow my network to be constrained by some COTS PC where the 
> vendors are unwilling to support it, or decide that it's cheaper to just 
> refund the entire cost than fix/replace it (As is happening with HP/Dell on 
> some devices now - google 'sandy bridge' and/or 'cougar point').  While an 
> ECO is something painful for anyone, I would rather it be on something where 
> the vendor is going to stand behind it, vs people who can't trust you to plug 
> in anything (optics, another vendors bgp speaking device, etc) and have their 
> devices operate properly.

(Sorry the following strays a bit off-topic for a technical mailing list, but I 
wanted to inject the operational reality as I see it from my vantage point).

Ultimately, I understand "different strokes for different folks".  My main 
point is: SIDR can't (or, at the very least) should not force a single 
operational or deployment model (i.e.: in-band transport in BGP of certs, etc.) 
on operators.  To emphasize this point further:
- Different networks have different EOL replacement strategies and, more 
importantly, timelines.  
- While some networks may be limited to only sourcing network equipment from a 
limited set of vendors, others are not.  Requiring crypto-assist onboard 
routers is likely to either take a very long time for a broader set of vendors 
to implement or have them abandon the market altogether.  Both would be very 
bad outcomes IMHO.

Thanks,

-shane
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Reply via email to