Operational Issues with 69.0.0.0/8...

> Sean Donelan, May 14 1998 (three employers ago, so this should not be
> taken as representing the official position any of my past, present or
> future employers)

               Yakhov, Elise, Mark, and Bill - 1994 as part of the RA
               project, bringers of the RAdb.

This gets to the heart of the matter. It is now 8 years later and RADB is
not catching on. But during the same time period some other UMich people
worked on a more general purpose directory service called LDAP and that
one is catching on. LDAP technology can be made to do the job that we need
done and instead of having to create tools from scratch we can leverage a
lot of commercial tools to deal with the core functions.

--Michael Dillon

This gets to the heart of the matter. It is now 8 years later and RADB is
not catching on. But during the same time period some other UMich people
worked on a more general purpose directory service called LDAP and that
one is catching on. LDAP technology can be made to do the job that we need
done and instead of having to create tools from scratch we can leverage a
lot of commercial tools to deal with the core functions.

you are confusing an application service, radb, with an underlying
store protocol, ldap. e.g., show me a routing db in ldap that has
10% the use of radb. by your reckoning, sql is the technology, as
ripe, apnic, and many others use it as the *store* for their routing
databases.

randy

It doesn't have anything to do with query serialization method.

RADB is a kludge forcing ISPs to make their routing infrastructure to
depend on an external and centralized resource, and introducing an extra
step (which takes non-negligible amount of time) to their customer
installation process.

The better way of dealing with the problem of bogus routes is strong
authentication of the actual routing updates, whith key being allocated
together with the address block. Solves unused address space reclaimation
problem, too - when the key expires, it becomes unroutable.

I always thought that RADB was a temporary band-aid, but it seems that
there was no progress in the field for quite a few years.

Unfortunately, trying to do some new stuff in the field is nearly
impossible - when VCs hear "backbone routing" they slam the door.

--vadim

<snip>

Of course, who would maintain the key databases and do you mean every route
would need a key with the central registrar or would it be carved up to eg
authority on /8 level or lir level which could be /22s.. seems at some point you
still have to go back to a central resource and if you dont have a single
resource you make it complicated?

Steve

There's a big difference: address allocation (and key distribution) is
off-line, and is not involved in operation of the routing system.
Its failure doesn't cause network malfunction, just aggravation of new
customers.

OTOH, invalid RADB data can easily prevent network from operating, on a
massive scale.

--vadim

Hmmmm. Didn't this entire thread start with "just aggravation of new
customers" - to wit, folks in 69/8 having problems reaching places with
filters that haven't been updated?

s/filters that haven't been updated/key databases that have not been
updated/, and it looks like we're right back where we started...

Hmmmm. Didn't this entire thread start with "just aggravation of new
customers" - to wit, folks in 69/8 having problems reaching places with
filters that haven't been updated?

s/filters that haven't been updated/key databases that have not been
updated/, and it looks like we're right back where we started...

Key databases:
Using cryptography to authenticate routing updates gets messy very soon.
Then, there will again be the same problem of the Public Key Infrastucture
not getting updated or something like that.

Harsha.

Hard to do it right, yes, but not impossible. (Actually I did strong
crypto for a living last few years, so I think I have somewhat informed
opinion on the subject :slight_smile:

--vadim

Hi,
  It would require a PKI and also require every router to support it.

Harsha.

Not every... borders are enough.

PKI is not that complicated, too; and routers already have some
implementation of it embedded (in VPN parts).

--vadim