On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 1:14 PM, <bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com> wrote: > > that was/is kindof orthoginal to the question... would the sidr plan > for routing security have been a help in this event? nice to know > unsecured IPv6 took some of the load when the unsecured IPv4 path > failed. >
if all routing goes boom, would secure routing have saved you? no... all routing went boom. > the answer seems to be NO, it would not have helped and would have actually > contributed to network instability with large numbers of validation requests > sent to the sidr/ca nodes. I think actually it wouldn't have caused more validation requests, the routers have (in some form of the plan) a cache from their local cache, they use this for origin validation... there's not a requirement to refresh up the entire chain. (I think). -chris > > /bill > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 10:01:04AM -0800, Mike Leber wrote: >> >> We saw an increase in IPv6 traffic which correlated time wise with the >> onset of this IPv4 incident. >> >> Happy eyeballs in action, automatically shifting what it could. >> >> Mike. >> >> On 11/8/11 2:56 AM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: >> >how would a sidr-enabled routing infrastructure have fared in yesterdays >> >routing circus? >> > >> >/bill >> > > >
