Speaking as regular ol’ member: On Jul 1, 2016, at 6:39 PM, Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com> wrote:
>> I'll revise that text to note the case of a resource transfer appears to >> be competition > > it is more than transfer. it is the very frequent operation of changing > tranist providers. i own P, but do not use bgp. my parent T0 announces > it for me (roa P-T0). i change upstream providers to T1. during the > move there are two roas, the second being P-T1. > > this all was very intentionally designed for make before break. > multiple roas with different ASs for the same prefix are normal. i > found it shocking and disappointing to have the introduction say > otherwise. As an aside, one of my favorite BGP sites is bgp.he.net, which includes a list of prefixes that are announced by more than one AS (http://bgp.he.net/report/multi-origin-routes). Many times it is easy to see why - the similarity in the AS names make it quite likely they “belong” to the same organization. But there are many times when the multiple origin ASs have no relationship. I don’t see that there’s a requirement that a router have only one certificate, either. A router that was configured to speak as two different ASs might have one key certified by both ASs and might have two different keys, one for each AS. —Ssandy > > randy > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
