Maybe it's just my impression, but this article tries to make it sound like they should have addressed this from the beginning.
Looking back, it's doubtful that a secure version up front would have worked. Routers were pretty feeble back then, and getting them to verify crypto signatures for advertisements would have been a non-starter.
This is especially true since there are still many issues with the secure replacements when it comes to key distribution issues, manipulating path costs, etc. With all of the modern crypto we have now, it's still a non-trivial problem to solve.
And misses the point (not to be a circuit switched bigot) that there where existing networks based on OSI that where technically superior.
But they cost a lot more and required more technical rigor to implement (yes I am looking at you Sprint/ Microsoft) and some times Good enough for jazz is the way to go.
Looking back, it's doubtful that a secure version up front would have worked. Routers were pretty feeble back then, and getting them to verify crypto signatures for advertisements would have been a non-starter.
This is especially true since there are still many issues with the secure replacements when it comes to key distribution issues, manipulating path costs, etc. With all of the modern crypto we have now, it's still a non-trivial problem to solve.