On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 2:19 PM Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On May 7, 2019, at 7:46 PM, Marilson Mapa <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...
> I mentioned the creation of BGP that replaced EGP, with policy-based > routing, a routing based on a set of non-technical rules, defined by > Autonomous Systems, to BGP4 designed to withstand the problems caused by > the great growth of the Internet. > > Yes, I remember it well. BGP4’s major enhancement vs. prior versions was > the introduction of CIDR to cope with the growth of the routing table. This > was a problem encountered well before the frenzy of e-commerce, web sites, > etc. Literally, people were still managing routers with Telnet. BARRnet was > still propagating RIP announcements from their customers into BGP. The > security model at the time on the internet was literally that of a small > town where only good actors were expected to participate. > > I have a file with 1.3 GB of criminal attitudes from ISPs, Registrars and > ICANN, protecting and hiding spammers and scammers. Scammers who were often > the providers themselves. Since 2014 I have sent spam and scam reports to > these institutions. There were hundreds of ISPs, and everyone, without > exception, protected and concealed their customers. So keep these old > wives’ tale for your grandchildren. > > On the internet back then, a lot happened in 8 years… BGP4 was introduced > with RFC-4271 in 2006. We must consider the environment of that time when > we are going to judge those who designed and built BGP4, not the > environment of 2014. > Just one thing.... 2006? More like 1994. If BGP Version 4 was a person: he/she would be old enough to drink. Proposed standard for BGP4 was RFC1654: later obsoleted by RFC1771, then 4271. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1654 I agree with Owen to say something was a "flawwed design"; is to say that this was because the designer made a mistake: which I am not convinced is the case. You need to understand what the original environment was for BGP4: what the original problem was. For the solution the conceptual task to be accomplished: the objectives, requirements, constraints, and assumptions behind the system are. The 2019 internet, and even the 2006 internet was likely not a reasonably forseeable use for a design that had happened before 1994. -- -JH
_______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
