Do Not Complicate Routing Security with Voodoo Economics

Neil J. McRae neil at
Sun Sep 4 15:32:36 UTC 2011

What operators are involved? And who represents them specifically?


On 04/09/2011 16:07, "Jennifer Rexford" <jrex at CS.Princeton.EDU> wrote:
>As one of the co-chairs of this working group, I'd like to chime in to
>clarify the purpose of this group.  Our goal is to assemble a group of
>vendors and operators (not "publish or perish" academics) to discuss and
>recommend effective strategies for incremental deployment of security
>solutions for BGP (e.g., such as the ongoing RPKI and BGP-SEC work).  It
>is not to design new security protocols or to "write policy and
>procedures for operators" -- that would of course be over-reaching and
>presumptuous.  The goal is specifically to identify strategies for
>incremental deployment of the solutions designed and evaluated by the
>appropriate technical groups (e.g., IETF working groups).  And, while the
>SIGCOMM paper you mention is an example of such a strategy, it is just
>one single example -- and is by no means the recommendation of a group
>that is not yet even fully assembled yet.  The working group will debate
>and discuss a great many issues before suggesting any strategies, and
>those strategies would be the output of the entire working group.
><tongue in cheek> As for "publish or perish" academics, I doubt you'll
>find that the small set of academics who choose to go knee deep into
>operational issues do so because they are trying to optimize their
>academic careers... ;) </tongue in cheek>
>-- Jen

More information about the NANOG mailing list