On 23-mei-2005, at 17:39, Randy Bush wrote:
o with sbgp, the assertion of the validity of asn A announcing prefix P to asn B is congruent with the bgp signaling itself, A merely signs the assertion in the bgp announcement.
o with sobgp, the assertion is in an external database with issues such as
This is nonsense. Did you even read the soBGP drafts? In S-BGP the certificates are carried in path attributes, in soBGP in a new BGP message. Other than that, they do not differ in this regard. And unless the implementations are stupid, it should be simple enough to use a web of trust rather than a fixed trust hierarchy, so the RRs don't (necessarily) come into play.
its the old simplicity vs complexity game yet again
Do I hear you say that S-BGP is less complex than soBGP??