Do Not Complicate Routing Security with Voodoo Economics

Owen DeLong owen at
Mon Sep 5 14:18:28 UTC 2011

On Sep 5, 2011, at 5:47 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:

> In a message written on Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 04:16:45PM -0400, Sharon Goldberg wrote:
>> An ISP might deploy S*BGP in order to increase the volume of traffic
>> that it transits for its customers.
> I think this phrase summarizes the problem with this argument nicely.
> If, as an ISP, deploying a "secure" routing protocol changes my
> traffic positively or negatively something is wrong.  Securing the
> routing system should not alter the routing system.
> I'm afraid as long as it does this work has an uphill battle.

One could argue that rejecting routes which you previously had no way to
know you should reject will inherently alter the routing system and that this
is probably a good thing.


More information about the NANOG mailing list