Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

The adoption discussion showed consensus that the wg wants to adopt this work. The authors should submit a draft using the usual wg draft naming convention: draft-ietf-sidr-yourtitlehere.txt —Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs (Actually, the adoption discussion was more energetic and

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Randy Bush wrote: now we're comparing the size of the guns used to shoot yourself in the foot? my point was that it needs to go in the sec cons. not the size of the type to be used. randy To be clear, I wasn't advocating an opinion, I was providing food for thought from a different angle.

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 6:06 PM Randy Bush wrote: > > Some people do use route servers, and won't do their own validation - > > I'd rather that they have the information available to make a decision > > than not... > > this glibly glosses over that, by outsourcing origin

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

>> this glibly glosses over that, by outsourcing origin validation, an >> attack vector is introduced. i presume i do not need to describe it. >> so it needs to be big in the sec cons. > Is it bigger than the attack vector allowed for when not doing origin > validation at all? now we're

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Randy Bush wrote: this glibly glosses over that, by outsourcing origin validation, an attack vector is introduced. i presume i do not need to describe it. so it needs to be big in the sec cons. Is it bigger than the attack vector allowed for when not doing origin validation at all? Kind

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

> Some people do use route servers, and won't do their own validation - > I'd rather that they have the information available to make a decision > than not... this glibly glosses over that, by outsourcing origin validation, an attack vector is introduced. i presume i do not need to describe it.

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: > ​sure, but I dont' always use the RS at the IX.​ >> >> > ... and you don't have to trust the RS if you do. > > This feel like a prefect being the enemy of the good type discussion -- > you shouldn't use RS, and you should

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Carlos M. Martinez wrote: > hey! > > On 5/5/16 3:30 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > I think it's an interesting topic to discuss, I'm a little worried > > > that: "Because the third party said things are 'ok' I'll believe > >

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

>> mostly because I don't see a clear method to ensure that 'third party' has: >>   1) up-to-date information > Same with RTR cache server. i would not load routers from rpki caches i do not own and control >>   2) my best interest at heart > If you peer with a route server, you should

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

hey! On 5/5/16 3:30 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > I think it's an interesting topic to discuss, I'm a little worried > > that: "Because the third party said things are 'ok' I'll believe > > things are ok!" > > > > mostly because I don't see a clear method to ensure that

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Hi Chris, I'm not sure if I get your point. On Thu, 5 May 2016, Christopher Morrow wrote: > I think it's an interesting topic to discuss, I'm a little worried > that: "Because the third party said things are 'ok' I'll believe > things are ok!" > > mostly because I don't see a clear method

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

(as a working group person) I think it's an interesting topic to discuss, I'm a little worried that: "Because the third party said things are 'ok' I'll believe things are ok!" mostly because I don't see a clear method to ensure that 'third party' has: 1) up-to-date information 2) my best

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01 The authors have requested working group adoption for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01, "Signaling Prefix Origin Validation Results from a Route-Server to Peers". This message starts an adoption call that will end in

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Hi, I support working group adoption, Oliver On 5/3/16, 5:55 AM, "sidr on behalf of Tim Bruijnzeels" wrote: >Hi, > >I believe this is useful work and support adoption. Happy to contribute to the >discussion where I can. > >Tim > > > > >>

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Hi, I believe this is useful work and support adoption. Happy to contribute to the discussion where I can. Tim > On 02 May 2016, at 15:32, Carlos M. Martinez wrote: > > Hello all, > > LACNIC has worked on three projects involving RPKI-enabling IXPs [0]. We >

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Hello all, LACNIC has worked on three projects involving RPKI-enabling IXPs [0]. We certainly support adoption of this document as a WG item and will participate in the discussion. Thanks! -Carlos [0] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fmejia-opsec-origin-a-country-02 On 4/27/16 8:11 AM,

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Greetings, As a co-author, I support the adoption and will participate in the discussion. Kind regards, Aris Lambrianidis > On 02 May 2016, at 10:54, Arnaud Fenioux wrote: > > Hi all, > > I support the adoption of this work as a working group work item and I will >

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Hi all, I support the adoption of this work as a working group work item and I will participate in the discussion. (I’m also one of the authors). Regards, -- Arnaud Fenioux Network Engineer - FranceIX > On 2 May 2016, at 09:50, Sebastian spies wrote: > > Hi

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Hi all, I support this Internet draft to be adopted as GROW working group document. Best regards, Sebastian Spies Sandra Murphy Mittwoch, 27. April 2016 14:11 The authors have requested working group adoption for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01,

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

slabs.com> Betr.: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01 > The authors have requested working group adoption for > draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01, "Signaling Prefix Origin > Validation Results from a Route-Server to

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Hi all, I support this Internet draft to be adopted as GROW working group document. Best regards, Bernd Spiess Bernd SPIESS Mobile: +43 676 848267 401 Email: bernd.spi...@ip-it.com ip-it consult GmbH Am Birkengrund 10, A-9073 Klagenfurt FN: 411144z / LG Klagenfurt / ATU 68538567 www.ip-it.com

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

Yes and yes. (I am one of the authors). Best regards, Thomas On 27/04/2016, 14:11, "sidr on behalf of Sandra Murphy" wrote: >The authors have requested working group adoption for >draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01, "Signaling

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

>Please respond on the list to say whether you support adoption of this work as >a working group work item AND whether you will participate in the discussion. yes and yes Sriram ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org

Re: [sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

> Please respond on the list to say whether you support adoption of this > work as a working group work item yes > AND whether you will participate in the discussion. i see no need to answer randy ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org

[sidr] working group adoption call for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01

The authors have requested working group adoption for draft-kklf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light-01, "Signaling Prefix Origin Validation Results from a Route-Server to Peers”. This message starts an adoption call that will end in two weeks on 11 May 2016. Please respond on the list to say whether