nanog mailing list archives
Re: soBGP deployment
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas () netcore fi>
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 21:55:06 +0300 (EEST)
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 sBGPalso 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
Current thread:
- soBGP deployment vijay gill (May 19)
- Re: soBGP deployment Christopher Woodfield (May 20)
- Re: soBGP deployment Christopher L. Morrow (May 20)
- Re: soBGP deployment Andrew Dul (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Randy Bush (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Pekka Savola (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Steven M. Bellovin (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Pekka Savola (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Randy Bush (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Russ White (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment william(at)elan.net (May 23)
- Re: soBGP deployment Pekka Savola (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Jeroen Massar (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Russ White (May 21)
- Re: soBGP deployment Larry J. Blunk (May 23)
- Re: soBGP deployment Randy Bush (May 23)
- Re: soBGP deployment Larry J. Blunk (May 23)
- Re: soBGP deployment Christopher Woodfield (May 20)