Joel,
While working groups can do all sorts of things, the expected results of
this work would be a new or extended mechanisms for routers to tell
other routers what address prefixes they will be using as source address
for packets they will be forwarding.
+
> For the primary work of this WG, what we are concerned with is providing
> the prefix information to use in that validation step.
I am still concerned with the scope of this effort.
IP reachability advertisement is nothing else then indicating what src addresses belong to a given site or ISP.
From what I have understood so far, the objective of this WG was to further trim that IP prefix to indicate a more granular IP address or even ports.
Therefore aside from privacy issues or exposing addresses and active ports for easy attacks I am still very concerned about cutting the ability to fallback to any other end to end routing path in the event of failures or even brownouts.
I have seen responses - Oh we will support backup and multipath. But this does not satisfy my concern as those will be still far less limited to what is available today - which is any node as long as it has reachability or default route can forward packets towards destination.
Thx,
R.
