Your analysis assumes that there a conventional BGP-4 AS_PATH field
and then there is is BGPSEC_Path_Signatures from which AS path info
can be inferred separately. This is not true in the latest BGPSEC
update format as Matt presented it in Paris.
How an optional attribute replace well-known mandatory one ?
Sorry but for such step formal IDR WG approval is necessary if you
choose to propose BGPSEC_Path_Signatures as mandatory attribute. This is
major BGP protocol change.
Documentation of partial deployment is required as well as two
interoperable implementations ;).
RFC4271:
5.1.2. AS_PATH
AS_PATH is a well-known mandatory attribute. This attribute
identifies the autonomous systems through which routing information
carried in this UPDATE message has passed. The components of this
list can be AS_SETs or AS_SEQUENCEs.
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-02.txt
This document specifies a new optional (non-transitive) BGP path
attribute, BGPSEC_Path_Signatures.
Best regards,
R.
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
