On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 1:47 PM, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote:
> Chris, > > sure... I think sriram may cover this in his document about the decision > processes which lead to where we are today. > > I think, one way to look at the document and situation is this: > o community folks for each RIR asked for RPKI to be supported > o RIR folk put in some development $$/effort to do that > o no single-root came forward > > This is NOT accurate. ICANN, as the IANA Internet Numbering Functions > Operator, did come forward and we were informed there was no interest from > the RIRs for the IANA Internet Numbering Functions Operator to participate > in testing a single root RPKI service. > ok, then that's distressing :( we can re-address the situation from the rirs north through I bet? > o to make the RPKI work, specifically for xfers, or one way wrt > transfers, is to fake the root at each RIR. > o rpki progress can still be made until single-root arrives, and then > some re-signing and probably rough work would have to happen to move under > the single-root. > [...] > apologies for not being up on the chain-of-command, but this doesn't seem > like it's enough... we've been waiting, what are the blockers? why can't > this action move forward? (yes, politics, let's move that to anyother list > I suppose) > > I suspect if the Internet Numbering Community would be interested in a > single root operated by the IANA Internet Numbering Functions Operator, all > they need do is _ask_. > excellent, thanks for the clarifications. -chris > Regards, > > -drc > > (ICANN CTO, but speaking only for myself. Really) > > P.S. In my previous note, I forgot to include the above disclaimer. I am > not speaking for ICANN here. >
_______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
