Subject: Re: the problem that needs solving vs the problem as seen by RPSL

From: [email-masked] (Chris Chaundy)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 14:51:00 +1000

At 20:03 6/9/98, Randy Bush wrote:
>> RPS oozing out of Resource Records would be a true
>> abomination worthy of unending suffering in the next world.
>
>roam.psg.com:/usr/home/randy> dig +norec @ns.isi.edu. 4555.rdi.int. axfr
>
>...

Joining this thread a little late... ;-)

The use of DNS to propogate routing policy info scares me, but it really
depends on the degree of trust you want to place in this information, and
the use(s) to which it is put.  If it is to be used for generating configs
(going back to the earlier 'what is rps for?' discussion), then basing a
'lower level' protocol configuration (routing) on dynamic data from a
'higher level' protocol (DNS) spooks me.

On the 'what is rps for?' topic, it needs to be decided if two different
languages are required where one may suffice, and whether development of
it for one purpose should impinge on others.  On a related topic, some
time back, I think I floated the concept of having 'private' records or
objects, only accessible to the maintainer, but this could be ugly to
implement, may not achieve what is wanted, and if you are going to be
that paranoid(sensible?), you will probably not want to use IRRs to stor
data used to build configurations anyway (we don't) - you run your own,
and then you can decide what you really want to 'publish'.

--
Chris Chaundy (Core Engineering Manager)

connect.com.au pty ltd, Level 9, 114 Albert Rd, Sth Melbourne, VIC 3205, Aust.
Internet: [email-masked]   Phone: +61 3 9251-3671   Fax: +61 3 9251-3666