[67905] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (william(at)elan.net)
Tue Feb 24 23:45:35 2004
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:40:40 -0800 (PST)
From: "william(at)elan.net" <william@elan.net>
To: Michel Py <michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <DD7FE473A8C3C245ADA2A2FE1709D90B0DAF41@server2003.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Michel Py wrote:
> Hint: all this bogon or related filtering is not a long-term solution.
> We need it now, but the long term solution is some kind of
> authentication that will allow only the rightful owner of a block to
> announce it.
This I completely agree with. The correct future solution is authentication of
network ownership of ip block with proper digital signatures (in fact I
think I put on completewhois website). Its too bad S-BGP does not seem to
be have futher development and more support. And I reject the idea that
not enough memory is a big problem for deployment - the memory on PCs is
really cheap now and the router vendors can easily develop routers with
1GB or RAM or more when needed and protocol can be done in a way that
signatures are complimentary/optional and not required so as to support
slow deployment.
PS. I have lots of ideas in this area, I'd love to know where to send them
all, I don't see any discussion on any public mailing list about S-BGP.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william@elan.net
