> On May 23, 2018, at 1:24 PM, Brian Dickson <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Sorry for the top-reply:
> 
> I think the fundamental problem with AS-SETs in IRR is the unilateral aspect 
> of "control" of what amounts to assertion of a relationship.
> 
> Given the basic mechanisms already in play for RPKI (keys, signing, etc.), I 
> think this would be easy enough to fix:
>       • Any relationship asserted should require both parties to confirm by 
> signing
>       • Any relationship can be revoked by either party (thus fixing the main 
> IRR problem)
>       • Anyone else can confirm that relationship via signatures
>       • The nature of the relationship would need to be reflected, in order 
> to have maximum benefit. E.g. transit-provider, transit-customer, peer, 
> mutual-transit, other.

So, this poses some challenges as it won’t actually fit into a well defined set 
of use-cases.

Being able to specify who can announce my route (or routes) and giving them a 
good way to specify this cone seems helpful.  Requiring both parties to sign, 
countersign, etc.. is not desirable or is problematic operationally.  How many 
e-mails back and forth have you seen go by where getting this updated is a 
problem?  I’ve seen quite a bit.  Not everyone is well automated and trying to 
use this as a sledge to turn that screw is going to be met with a collective 
yawn and be ignored by many folks.

- Jared

>       • This plays well with preventing route-leaks, too.
> This would only require the ability to associate things like groups of ASNs 
> with single entities that speak for them. If that isn't already part of RPKI, 
> it would need to be added.
> 
> Brian
> 
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Job Snijders <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:03:45AM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> > >>> me and Job Snijders have recently submitted
> > >>> draft-ss-grow-rpki-as-cones-00, which discusses AS-Cones, an
> > >>> attempt to bring as-sets into RPKI to facilitate route filtering.
> > >> 
> > >> in irr, an as-set may reference an as-set.  could you explain the
> > >> authority model you have for this when as-sets are signed?
> > 
> > > My initial thinking for RPKI AS Cones, is that a given Cone in an
> > > ASN's namespace can only be defined by the owner of the ASN in who's
> > > namespace the Cone is defined.
> > 
> > namespace?
> 
> In the IRR world we have the concept of hierarchical naming of AS-SETs:
> an example is "AS15562:AS-SNIJDERS" [1] - under the "AS15562" hierarchy
> only the owner (or delegated folks) can add/change/remove AS-SETS. I
> call this a namespace, should a different term be used?
> 
> > isn't this the irr authorisation model?
> 
> The IRR AS-SET feature is working pretty well (since it is better than
> nothing), but there are some downsides.
> 
> For instance "AS15562:AS-SNIJDERS" can exist in multiple IRR databases,
> and we don't know which of those was actually created by the owner of
> AS15562. I hope this can be addressed in AS Cones.
> 
> Another problem is that there no longer is a way (or perhaps there never
> was) to autodetect what AS-SET should be used by which organisation to
> generate a filter. RPSL is broken, fundamentally flawed. Perhaps this
> can be addressed - not by introducing a new language - but just having a
> handy naming convention. Think of it as "AS15562:AS-2914", so AS 2914
> knows it should use AS15562:AS-2914 if it exists, and if it doesn't
> exist use AS15562:AS-DEFAULT.
> 
> > and how did that work out for us?
> 
> I consider it a feature that anyone can add anything to an AS-SET they
> created, this puts the workload on transit providers and doesn't require
> stub networks to do anything. The "member-of:" feature is barely used
> and seems to pose too much work.
> 
> Clock is ticking... multiple RIRs are struggling with their IRRs (or
> lack thereof). If IETF does not pony up a solution that is good enough
> for operational purposes, we may end up with RIRs investing in legacy
> technology and a continuation of the duplication/discovery/ownership
> issue. There is an opportunity here and now, let's work on it?
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Job
> 
> [1]: 
> https://apps.db.ripe.net/db-web-ui/#/query?searchtext=AS15562:AS-SNIJDERS#resultsSection
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to