[80998] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: soBGP deployment
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Pekka Savola)
Sat May 21 14:55:57 2005
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 21:55:06 +0300 (EEST)
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: vijay gill <vijay@umbc.edu>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <17039.32050.638441.883735@roam.psg.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sat, 21 May 2005, Randy Bush wrote:
> something like it, for sure. but i vastly prefer the s-bgp
> approach as it maps closely to bgp operational reality, and does
> not rely on a published policy database, which we have seen fail
> for over a decade, etc.
So, can someone point out the important operational differences
between the two?
From 10K feet view, the only major difference seems to be that sBGP
also wants to protect the BGP sessions w/ IPsec all in one solution.
(Personally, I don't care about that all that much, and I have some
doubts whether this is a good approach for deployability in mind.)
Maybe the important operational differences are only observable
from 1K feet view ?
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
