1 quick note on the numbers below (I've not read the paper, just the commentary)

also, thanks to eric for making some work available, and taking a stab
at the numbers/sizing/speeding.

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:36 PM, Arturo Servin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Erick
>
>         Very interesting research. But I am finding difficult to understand 
> how
> you got 1.4 M objects.
>
>         Let me try to explain what I have seen in the young deployment of 
> RPKI.
> For simplicity let's use the "hosted" model of RIRs.
>
>         Let's suppose, each RIR issues in average 1 certificate per member
> containing all the resources (v4,v6,ASNs). I would say that there are
> 40,000 entities holding IP(4 and 6) prefixes and/or ASNs in the world
> (same as number of ASs). What I have see is that most prefix holders
> issue one roa with all the resources, but let's use 5 ROAs per
> organization as average. Then we have:
>
> 40,000 certificates
> 200,000 roas
> 80,000 CRL,manifest
> 40,000 ghostbuster (not very deployed but let's count it)
>
>         Am I missing something besides the Router EE? Or is the Router EE that
> makes the difference?
>
>         It seems that we agree that Ototal is the same equation, but the 
> values
> for Cas, Eas, etc. are different.
>
>         But, anyways. It's aprox 350K objects. If we want to load all in 5

x2 - keyrollover

-chris

> minutes (it would be good to define what is acceptable) we need to
> deliver objects in less 0.00085 secs.
>
> Regards,
> as
>
>
>
>
> On 15/11/2012 01:47, Eric Osterweil wrote:
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> A couple of us have done some quick back-of-the-envelope style calculations 
>> to help get an idea of what a global deployment of RPKI (supporting a global 
>> BGPSEC deployment) might look like, if we were to be able to deploy it.  
>> We've written up our methodology, evaluation, and findings in a short little 
>> tech-note here:
>>       http://techreports.verisignlabs.com/tr-lookup.cgi?trid=1120005
>>
>> What we tried to do was calculate an extreme _lower_bound_ on what the 
>> overall gather/fetch times might be for a cache trying to gather a fully 
>> deployed RPKI repository.  This seemed to be particularly opportune moment 
>> to raise this topic, re: some comments recently posted in the thread, ``Re: 
>> [sidr] additions and changes to agenda on Friday:''
>>>  1) size of a single repository (pick a large ISP as a for-instance,
>>> some one like L3 who has ~30k customers, each with 5 routes average x2
>>> for keyroll situations? - or better yet, make up your own set of
>>> numbers, document them and the reasoning why)
>>>  2) number of repositories in existence (say, number of ASN in the
>>> global table, or ...)
>>>  3) re-fetch times of every repository (3 hrs for instance for any
>>> object type?)
>>>  4) average network latency from fetcher to fetchee (~150ms for instance)
>>>
>>> document that and then start looking at tradeoffs and consequences?
>>
>> What we found is that by creating a  _systematic_ estimate of what a global 
>> RPKI would look like, we wind up with roughly 1.5 million objects (we 
>> explain why we feel this is a large _underestimate_ in the tech-note), and 
>> in order to ensure that all caches have received updated information (such 
>> as getting new certificates/CRLs/etc disseminated), repositories may have to 
>> wait about a month (roughly 32 days by our estimates), just for gatherers to 
>> reliably pick up a repo's changes.  Or, a month before a key compromise 
>> might get remediated throughout the RPKI system.
>>
>> Our sincere hope is that this tech note will be a living document.  To that 
>> end, comments, corrections, and feedback are very welcome.
>>
>> Eric
>> _______________________________________________
>> sidr mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>>
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Reply via email to