LibinLiu0189
commented
1 week ago Revision: We have incorporated the suggested new paragraph into Section 4 as the following: “SAV-specific information communication mechanism will require specifying a new inter-router (or inter-AS) communication protocol or modifying an existing one. Therefore, while this is pursued, a new SAV mechanism that utilizes RPKI objects (e.g., ROA, ASPA) and BGP data (RIB/FIB) can be pursued. The latter solution may have the potential for deployment in the near term since it utilizes existing SAV-related information and can be deployed by network operators by policy configuration on routers.”
[KS:] The draft mentions, “detailed design of the SAV-specific information communication mechanism for dealing with route changes is outside the scope of this document.” Yet, a significant amount of text is devoted to describing the same. So, the draft does appear to get into the solution space focusing on SAV-specific information. To provide a comprehensive and balanced perspective, and to give due consideration to alternative solution approaches, I would recommend that the following new text be incorporated into the draft:
--- begin suggested paragraph --- The solution using SAV-specific information and communication mechanism will require specifying a new inter-router (or inter-AS) communications protocol or modifying an existing one as well as significant router implementation upgrades. Therefore, while that is pursued, independently a solution that primarily utilizes RPKI data (e.g., ROA, ASPA) and BGP data (RIB/FIB) should be pursued. The latter solution would be a BCP (improving on BCP 84 [RFC 8704]) and has the potential for deployment in the near term since it utilizes existing SAV related data and can be deployed by network operators by policy configuration on routers. --- end suggested paragraph ---
[Libin:] Will do.