nanog mailing list archives
Re: BGP to doom us all
From: batz <batsy () vapour net>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 20:50:35 -0500 (EST)
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Randy Bush wrote: :> I think the only problem with the comments is that they :> over-estimate the benefit of that level of security relative :> to the overhead it requires. : :crypto hardware has become cheap. Cheap to buy, but the time for processing each certificate will increase with the size of the routing table, and we just end up replicating the problem of recalculating large routing tables, but now with certification, no? -- batz
Current thread:
- Re: BGP to doom us all, (continued)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Randy Bush (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Steven M. Bellovin (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all batz (Feb 28)
- RE: BGP to doom us all Barry Raveendran Greene (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Steven M. Bellovin (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Sean Donelan (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Bruce Robertson (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Randy Bush (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all batz (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Randy Bush (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all batz (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Randy Bush (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all batz (Feb 28)
- Re: BGP to doom us all Bruce Pinsky (Feb 28)