Browse Prior Art Database

Routing Policy System Replication (RFC2769)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000003367D
Original Publication Date: 2000-Feb-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 33 page(s) / 89K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

C. Villamizar: AUTHOR [+4]

Abstract

The RIPE database specifications and RPSL define languages used as the basis for representing information in a routing policy system. A repository for routing policy system information is known as a routing registry. A routing registry provides a means of exchanging information needed to address many issues of importance to the operation of the Internet. The implementation and deployment of a routing policy system must maintain some degree of integrity to be of any use. The Routing Policy System Security RFC [3] addresses the need to assure integrity of the data by proposing an authentication and authorization model. This document addresses the need to distribute data over multiple repositories and delegate authority for data subsets to other repositories without compromising the authorization model established in Routing Policy System Security RFC.

This text was extracted from a ASCII document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 3% of the total text.

Network Working Group C. Villamizar

Request for Comments: 2769 Avici Systems

Category: Standards Track C. Alaettinoglu

R. Govindan

ISI

D. Meyer

Cisco

February 2000

Routing Policy System Replication

Status of this Memo

This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the

Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for

improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet

Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state

and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved.

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",

"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this

document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.

Abstract

The RIPE database specifications and RPSL define languages used as

the basis for representing information in a routing policy system. A

repository for routing policy system information is known as a

routing registry. A routing registry provides a means of exchanging

information needed to address many issues of importance to the

operation of the Internet. The implementation and deployment of a

routing policy system must maintain some degree of integrity to be of

any use. The Routing Policy System Security RFC [3] addresses the

need to assure integrity of the data by proposing an authentication

and authorization model. This document addresses the need to

distribute data over multiple repositories and delegate authority for

data subsets to other repositories without compromising the

authorization model established in Routing Policy System Security

RFC.

Table of Contents

1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2 Data Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3 Authentication and Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

4 Repository Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

5 Additions to RPSL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

5.1 repository object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

5.2 delegated attribute . . ....