Re: So -- what did happen to Panix?

[bmanning () vacation karoshi com]

On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 04:36:28AM -0800, Randy Bush wrote:
> > what I saw by going through the diffs, etc.. that I have
> > available to me is that the prefix was registered to be announced
> > by our customer and hence made it into our automatic IRR filters.
>
> i.e., the 'error' was intended, and followed all process.
>
> so, what i don't see is how any hacks on routing, such as delay,
> history, ... will prevent this while not, at the same time, have
> very undesired effects on those legitimately changing isps.
>
> seems to me that certified validation of prefix ownership and as
> path are the only real way out of these problems that does not
> teach us the 42 reasons we use a *dynamic* protocol.

        perhaps you mean certified validation of prefix origin
        and path.  Ownership of any given prefix is a dicey concept
        at best.

        as a start, i'd want two things for authentication and integrity
        checks:  AS P asserts it is the origin of prefix R and prefix R
        asserts the true origin AS is P (or Q or some list).  Being able
        to check these assertions and being assured of the authenticity
        and integrity of the answers goes a long way, at least for me.

        path validation is something else and a worthwhile goal.
--bill
        
> what am i missing here?
>
> randy