1. RPKI implementation experiences in the LAC Region Carlos M. Martínez – Arturo Servín LACSEC 2012 – LACNIC XVIII

2. What is RPKI?  RPKI (Resource Public Key Infrastructure) allows the validation of an organization right to use of a certain resource (IPv4, IPv6, ASN)  RPKI combines the hierarchy of the Internet resource assignment model through RIRs with the use of digital certificates based on standard X.509  RPKI is standardized in the IETF through the SIDR WG. It has produced RFCs 6480 – 6492

3. Application of RPKI  One of the threats to the routing system is the forging of the origin autonomous system in BGP.  To reduce monkey-in-the-middle attacks and misconfiguration errors in BGP we use RPKI to validate the autonomous system that originates a prefix

4. RPKI Architecture and Origin Validation Cache RPKI Management System Repository

5. Types of users  Prefix holder  You want to certify your prefixes and create ROAs  Router operator  You want to validate prefixes using RPKI and origin- validation  You are both

6. Prefix Holder  You need to create and publish your resource certificate and your ROAs  One way is to use RIRs systems already deployed  Run your own CA and repository

7. Router Operator  You need an origin-validation capable router, an RPKI cache and at least one trust anchor  Cisco, Juniper and Quagga (srx-module) are capable routers  RIPE NCC and others have cache implementations  Each RIR is the trust anchor of the resources (IPv6 and IPv4) that they have allocated

8. Router Operator (2)  Configure your cache to pull the TALs from RIRs  Configure your router and cache to speak RTR  Configure policies in your router  Check your BGP routes

9. Validation Cache  RIPE NCC  Java, runs almost anywhere, supports (RPKI routing protocol  Download: http://labs.ripe.net/Members/agowland/ripencc- rpki-validator.zip/viewhttp://labs.ripe.net/Members/agowland/ripencc- rpki-validator.zip/view  Rcynic  Runs in unix like systems  Download: http://rpki.nethttp://rpki.net  BBN  Written in C++, tested in linux but it may run in other unix like systems

10. Routers  Cisco  Production software for ASR1000, 7600, ASR903 and ASR901 – releases 15.2(1)S or XE 3.5  Juniper  Beta versions in JunOS  Production version sometime in 2012  Quagga  Quagga SRX, developed by NIST US  3 rd -party patch, merge into mainline Quagga planned for later in 2012

11. RPKI in the LAC Region This segment of the talk is biased – It covers operational experience from our service region only (LACNIC) – I assume people should know what their network is actually doing – So take all this with a grain of salt It is not meant to be hard on early adopters – Early adopters always get burnt, but they gather and provide extremely valuable experience

12. RPKI in the LACNIC Service Region Where are we? – Slowly getting there – There is a lot of interest in the community – A bit of disappointment due to lack of router software This should change later this year Noticeable increments in usage after our conferences ~200** prefixes, 6% of announced IPv4 covered by ROAs 2 nd place among all regions behind RIPE-NCC by some measurements

13. RPKI Evolution Prefixes Signed IPv4 Space Covered by ROAs (in % of total)

14. Nice, right? Or... … perhaps not Statistics show that the quality of the ROAs created tends to be not-very-good Quality in this context means 'first do no harm' – Your ROAs should not create 'artificial' invalids, otherwise trust in the system will be quickly undermined once BGP speakers start validating Our region was creating almost ~1500 invalids

15. How we figured it out?  http://www.labs.lacnic.net/rpkitools/looking_glass/

16. Why ? What is Going On ? Network-related issues – Lack of awareness on how a 'complex' network is actually, well, 'networking' with its peers 'Complex' as in 'I use more than one AS' Failure to properly identify correct originating AS – Flabbergasting levels of de-aggregation Sometimes for TE needs, sometimes hard-to-explain Make creation of proper ROAs impractical with currently available tools System-related

17. Why ? What is Going On ? (ii) System-related – Lack of 'previewing' or 'prototyping' tools Leading to 'blind' ROA creation and lots of trial & error – Lack of awareness of tools like RIS

18. What Now? What Should We Do? Act now: – We contacted our worst offenders and reduced our count of invalids by 75% while keeping them using the system Plan for the future: – Provide better tools Ways of 'previewing' the effect of a ROA – RIS data invaluable for this purpose Batch-creation of ROAs Up/Down – Integrate them with the hosted system BGP Training Remember the BGP BoF later today

19. Thank you ! carlos @ lacnic.net aservin @ lacnic.net