Re: [sidr] Request for WG Last Call for draft-ietf-sidr-bogons-02.txt and draft-ietf-sidr-roa-validation-01.txt

Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:27:00 -0800 


On 11/17/08 7:44 PM, "Geoff Huston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Again my interpretation is that a ROA is a positive assertion and not
> a negative assertion about all other possible route objects. If you
> want to extend this then the choices are either to extend the
> semantics of the ROA, either implicitly or explicitly, or introduce a
> new object, other the AS0 concept, or the explicit negation concept of
> the BOA draft. The BOA concept makes this negations explicit.

This all makes sense, and the BOA seems to be straightforward way of
implementing a negative assertion.

After Steve Kent's description of ROAs flowing from the top and being
constantly reshaped based on allocations, I'd like to withdraw my objection
to BOAs.  It would seem they are necessary.

-andy

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





























					Reply via email to