Re: soBGP deployment

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb () cs columbia edu>]

In message <B6DE33ED-0C90-46A1-ACD9-329F10905B0B () muada com>, Iljitsch van Beijn
um writes:
> On 23-mei-2005, at 17:39, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> >   o with sbgp, the assertion of the validity of asn A announcing
> >     prefix P to asn B is congruent with the bgp signaling itself,
> >     A merely signs the assertion in the bgp announcement.
>
> >   o with sobgp, the assertion is in an external database with
> >     issues such as
>
> This is nonsense. Did you even read the soBGP drafts?
>
> In S-BGP the certificates are carried in path attributes, in soBGP in  
> a new BGP message. Other than that, they do not differ in this regard.

Randy isn't talking about certificates, he's talking about how you tell 
if a path is legitimate.

                --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb