Re: [sidr] SIDR Charter Question

...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Chris Morrow Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 11:30 AM To: Geoff Huston Cc: Sandra Murphy; sidr wg Subject: Re: [sidr] SIDR Charter Question Geoff Huston wrote: On 29/04/2010, at 5:24 AM, Chris Morrow wrote: Sandra Murphy wrote: The relative frequency of use

Re: [sidr] SIDR ReCharter - to capture/cover path validation work

On 02/18/11 12:11, John Leslie wrote: Russ White r...@cisco.com wrote: To: Christopher Morrow christopher.mor...@gmail.com * Is an Autonomous System (AS) authorized to originate an IP prefix * Is the AS-Path represented in the route the same as the path through which the route update

[sidr] SIDR Interim meeting 4/30/2012 (April 30, 2012) - IAD

Hello IESG Secretary, Please send out an announcement to the right places for an interim meeting (plus virtual attendance) for the SIDR-wg, April 30, 2012. Location: Adjacent to the Dulles Airport, Reston, VA, USA 20190-4415 Time: 0900 - 1700 EDT Draft agenda to be sent ~4/10/12. Thanks! -Chris

[sidr] Interim Meeting Draft Agenda: 04-30-2012 (April 30, 2012)

(bcc: iesg-secretary) SIDR folk, A draft agenda for the April 30, 2012 meeting is below: 0900-1200 deployment discussion (walkthrough/document/discuss deployment scenarios) 1300-1600 o router/prefix/roa/crl - rpki repository data freshness 1600-1700 prefix validate discussion This will

[sidr] Interim Meeting Notes / Participation modes / wiki updated

Howdy folks, For those interested in the Apr 30 Interim meeting, we updated the wiki: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sidr/trac/wiki/InterimMeeting20120430 to include as much as we currently can say about the location/agenda/remote-participation-foo. I believe that the intent is to run the

Re: [sidr] Interim Meeting Draft Agenda: 04-30-2012 (April 30, 2012)

On 04/11/2012 01:28 PM, Murphy, Sandra wrote: speaking as regular ol' member On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 9:15 PM, Danny McPherson [da...@tcb.net] said: From there, we can discuss the issue of, for example, HOW TO onboard and purge signing and validating certificates to routers from the RPKI

Re: [sidr] Interim Meeting Draft Agenda: 04-30-2012 (April 30, 2012)

On 04/11/2012 01:57 PM, Danny McPherson wrote: I suppose, to me this looks like any other configuration thing you do today on routers... beating the vendor over the head to support sane (netconf? maybe?) methods for provisioning, is already done. So how we onboard, update, or purge

[sidr] Interim Meeting (Apr 30, 2012) fallout/lessons/room-foo

Howdy, for the folks that attended in person, and remotely I think we (chairs) would like to get some feedback on how the meeting was done. I think we know of a few stumbling blocks: 1) late start/technology fail with the webex (probably webex operations failures more than anything - my

Re: [sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles

On 05/03/2012 03:57 AM, t.petch wrote: A question arising from my ignorance. How do values in the security arc get assigned? Not IANA since there are no IANA considerations, but how then? good question... the below are asn.1 things, quickly searching around isn't helping me out much

Re: [sidr] Interim Meeting (Apr 30, 2012) fallout/lessons/room-foo

On 05/04/2012 03:42 PM, John G. Scudder wrote: A few things in addition to what others have said: On May 3, 2012, at 12:08 AM, Chris Morrow wrote: o shared slides prior to the meeting (no slides, no slot. potentially) We covered a fair amount of ground at the interim without using

Re: [sidr] RPKI and private keys (was RE: Interim Meeting Draft Agenda: 04-30-2012 (April 30, 2012)))

On 05/04/2012 08:59 PM, Osterweil, Eric wrote: His point is NOT addressed by any draft in the wg (since you asked). read randy's mentioned draft? ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Re: [sidr] RPKI and private keys (was RE: Interim Meeting Draft Agenda: 04-30-2012 (April 30, 2012)))

On 05/04/2012 10:30 PM, Osterweil, Eric wrote: Well, when u compared the key mgmt that is done today w/ the key mgmt that will need to be done with bgpsec keys on routers, I think there was an strained analogy. I'm talking about the latter, but I was trying to indulge the discussion. ;)

Re: [sidr] RPKI and private keys (was RE: Interim Meeting Draft Agenda: 04-30-2012 (April 30, 2012)))

On 05/04/2012 11:01 PM, Jakob Heitz wrote: Might it be possible to create the key pair on the router? Then you don't have to move the private key to the router, You move the public key off the router. Much easier. you could, but I presume the thing being created is really a cert (ee-cert)

[sidr] WG Adoption: draft-ymbk-bgpsec-rtr-rekeying-00.txt

Howdy WG folk, The authors of: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ymbk-bgpsec-rtr-rekeying-00 Would like to see if the document meets WG usefulness levels high enough to be included as a WG document. The abstract of the doc is (for the click-lazy): BGPsec-speaking routers must be provisioned

[sidr] [INTERIM MEETING 6/6] Agenda update

The 6/6/2012 (6/6/2012 for the EU folks or Jun 6 2012) meeting agenda looks like: * aspath not present - implications? - scudder's notes at previous meeting perhaps not all the bugs worked out/considerations made (not just tools, re-figuring the aspath on entrance/exit,

Re: [sidr] register for 6 Jun interim meeting

The wiki page lists very few registrations for the interim meeting one week from today. Please do register if you intend to come. You should also register if you attend to participate remotely. Registration is by sending an email message to sidr-chairs+reg06062...@ietf.org. There is no

[sidr] Minutes of 6/6/12 meeting uploaded

Thanks to the minutes taker (Anuja) we have minutes, I uploaded them to: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2012/06/06/sidr/minutes/minutes-interim-2012-sidr-3.txt -chris co-chair ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org

[sidr] 06/29/2012 Interim meeting update/draft-agenda

Howdy folk, Just in case people aren't refreshing the wiki page incessantly... http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sidr/trac/wiki links to: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sidr/trac/wiki/InterimMeeting20120629 which has more information about the 6/29 meeting. -chris

[sidr] Measurement sizing and requirements

Slides from the last interim in reston have sizing estimates from Geoff Huston on the eventual targets for the rpki system size. We should codify these in the requirements draft(s) in order to evaluate the current systems and future ones against a consistent benchmark. -chris

Re: [sidr] RFC5291 - Outbound Route Filter Capability

IDR not S-IDR ? (or I missed the tie-in to S-IDR...) On 02/06/2013 01:47 PM, Stewart Bryant wrote: The following errata was filed, but this is beyond the scope of an errata system to address. I think that the right process is for the WG to decide the answer and if necessary for someone to

Re: [sidr] RFC5291 - Outbound Route Filter Capability

On 02/06/2013 01:52 PM, Stewart Bryant wrote: I beg your pardon - I missed the S in the WG column. Moving it over there awesome, thanks! :) it does look like something IDR should poke at though. Stewart On 06/02/2013 18:50, Chris Morrow wrote: IDR not S-IDR ? (or I missed the tie

[sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-cps (end 2013-03-07 - Mar 07, 2013)

WG folks, As the subject states, let's please start a WGLC poll for the document: draft-ietf-sidr-cps-01 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-cps-01 with the abstract: This document contains a template to be used for creating a Certification Practice Statement (CPS) for an

Re: [sidr] comments on the repository analysis I-D

On 03/21/2013 04:11 PM, Stephen Kent wrote: Chris, ...most likely you are not... I think I jump to 'CA == REPO == AS-Operator == ASN allocated' because lacking any direct data otherwise it seems like a good estimation of numbers. Essentially each ASN allocated is going to be a repository

Re: [sidr] comments on the repository analysis I-D

On 03/21/2013 04:15 PM, Stephen Kent wrote: Chris, On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote: In our analysis we associate number of CAs in the global RPKI with the number of distinct IP resource holders. sure, and as a proxy for that 'AS Operator', it's not a 1:1

Re: [sidr] comments on the repository analysis I-D

On 03/22/2013 01:50 AM, Randy Bush wrote: how do you propose we measure how large the number of CA/Repositories is going to be in 1yr? 5 yrs? 10 yrs? we can not measure the future until it gets here. the best we can do is estimate it based on the present and past. which was what I was

[sidr] draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling - new version submitted recently... WGLC?

I believe the authors wanted this to progress, I believe there was recently (8/29/2013) an updated version submitted, does it deal with the outstanding comments? (the diff doesn't show much more than boilerplate-like changes) Should this be WGLC'd at this point? -chris co-chair-type-item

[sidr] WG Adoption: draft-ymbk-lta-use-cases

Howdy gentle WG folks, The authors of: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ymbk-lta-use-cases-00 are interested in starting a WG Adoption call for this piece of scribed text. It would be good if other folk also agreed about the adoption. The abstract says: There are a number of critical

[sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-reqs

Working Group Folken, Today starts a WGLC for the subject draft: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-reqs Abstract: This document describes requirements for a BGP security protocol design to provide cryptographic assurance that the origin AS had the right to

[sidr] Agenda discussion topics

Howdy SIDR folk! So in getting ready for Toronto a few things seem like they should be on the agenda, though we've (chair-folk) not heard +/- from the authors of these documents/ideas: 1) Validation Algorithm Document/process - We've talked about this on-list a bit, and in at least 3

[sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration

Howdy SIDR folken, It's time again to dust off your spectacles and dive into a wonderous world of 'potential RFC' reading material!! It'd be great if we could start this WGLC today: 8/28/2014 or August 28 2014 or the 240th day of this year 2014 and end it in 2 weeks time on: 9/11/2014

[sidr] A note prior to the meeting ... about behavior

Howdy folks! It occurs to me that we didn't say something clearly and (maybe) concisely after the last in-person meeting about expectations for working group person behavior... so, with that in mind please: 1) be courteous 2) do not make your argument about the other person or how you feel

[sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-rpsl-sig - End Jul 02 2015

Howdy WG Folks, Today is your day! we start a WGLC for: draft-ietf-sidr-rpsl-sig https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rpsl-sig-07 Abstract: This document describes a method to allow parties to electronically sign RPSL-like objects and validate such electronic signatures. This

[sidr] SIDR Secretary

Howdy SIDR folk, after nearly 2.5 yrs (I think?) Sam Weiler is stepping down (actually he did this at the end of the Dallas meeting...) as SIDR WG Secretary. We are happy to have had Sam's assistance for this period of time, thanks Sam! -chris (a sidr co-chair personage)

[sidr] LTA Management and friend(s): draft-ietf-sidr-ltamgmt

Howdy SIDR folks, This draft expired: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/sidr/draft-ietf-sidr-ltamgmt/ I think this is proper, given the discussion on-list and in-person, we seem to have moved away from the world of LTA management and on to: slurm:

[sidr] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ymbk-sidr-transfer-00.txt

Howdy SIDR Folk! lookenz peeperz! achtung! On 06/01/2015 07:05 PM, A Spy Satellite wrote: A new version of I-D, draft-ymbk-sidr-transfer-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Randy Bush and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-ymbk-sidr-transfer Revision: 00 Title:

[sidr] Agenda Items Request - Yokohama

Howdy folks, We'll be in Yokohama in meeting rooms... so we should have agenda items. Speak up now pls for meeting topics! -chris co-chair ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

[sidr] WG Adoption: draft-dseomn-sidr-slurm

Howdy WG folks! the adoption call for: draft-dseomn-sidr-slurm is long since past, but I think despite the mild reply set, taking the work on seems acceptable to the WG, let's re-issue a re-named draft and discuss more on the list. Authors pls follow the 'publish new draft' process, thanks!

[sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview ENDING: 10/21/2015)

Howdy WG folks, Please consider this your warning/notice that the WGLC has been started for: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview Abstract: "This document provides an overview of a security extension to the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) referred to as BGPsec. BGPsec improves security for

Re: [sidr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7132 (4454)

This seems correct to me (the proposed change I mean) At Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:45:52 -0700 (PDT), RFC Errata System wrote: The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7132, Threat Model for BGP Path Security. -- You may review the report below

[sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops - ENDS: 2016-06-14 (June 14 2016)

Howdy WG folks, Please take this note as the start of the 2wk WGLC period for: Abstract: "Deployment of the BGPsec architecture and protocols has many operational considerations. This document attempts to collect and present

Re: [sidr] two stranded docuemnts - stake time

At Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:48:30 -0400, Stephen Kent wrote: > > [1 ] > Chris, > > Here is my message to the SIDR list from 6/16: > great, thanks! > >I read the latest version of this document and have a few comments, >some of which I have made before, to no avail ;-). >

Re: [sidr] two stranded docuemnts - stake time

At Thu, 21 Jul 2016 13:42:07 -0400, Stephen Kent wrote: > > Sandy & Chris, > > I believe Chris' declaration is premature. > > I anticipate that Dr. Ma may want to take over slurm, with David's > permission. > > With a few minor tweaks the use cases doc can be done. ok, let's

[sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-publication - ENDS: 08/18/2016 - August 18, 2016

Good morning (european folks): This starts the 2 week (14 days or 336 hr) WGLC for: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-publication-08 Abstract content: "This document defines a protocol for publishing Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) objects. Even though the RPKI will

[sidr] two stranded docuemnts - stake time

We are going to officially stake: 1) draft-ietf-sidr-slurm 2) draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases These are not being progressed currently, and won't be in the future it seems. We'll do the process bits next week to remove them from SIDR's work queue. -chris

[sidr] SIDR operations area proposed Charter

Howdy! as promised in the meeting today (berlin july 21 2016): I believe this is the current proposed charter for a group in the ops-area, I (and sandy) would appreciate comments/questions/help/text on this proposal, as we would like

Re: [sidr] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

At Thu, 2 Mar 2017 14:06:53 +, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > On 2 Mar 2017, at 13:42, Rob Austein wrote: > > > > At Thu, 02 Mar 2017 03:04:24 -0800, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > >> > >>

[sidr] Current document status && directionz

Howdy SIDR peeps, (+bonus ops ad) Following on the Berlin meeting we were trying to accomplish two things: 1) get all documents related to sidr protocols into wglc and then publication 2) get all documents which are more operationally focused moved along to an ops group (sidr-ops or

Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz

for > > the ‘all resources’ applicability statement draft. > > > > thanks! > > > > -Carlos > > > > On 2 Sep 2016, at 17:56, Chris Morrow wrote: > > > >> > >> Howdy SIDR peeps, > >> (+bonus ops ad) > &g

Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz

At Sat, 3 Sep 2016 14:06:25 -0700, joel jaeggli <joe...@bogus.com> wrote: > > [1 Re: Current document status && directionz ] > [1.1 ] > On 9/2/16 1:56 PM, Chris Morrow wrote: > > > > Howdy SIDR peeps, > > (+bonus ops ad) > > > > Followin

[sidr] Agenda Upload

Draft Agenda was uploaded moments ago. I'm sure I missed something(s) I'm also sure I signed Tim up for at least 2 things he wasn't prepared for (and may not be required) it's a draft :) -chris ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org

Re: [sidr] Agenda Upload

At Tue, 8 Nov 2016 10:22:34 +0100, Tim Bruijnzeels <t...@ripe.net> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > > On 08 Nov 2016, at 00:26, Chris Morrow <morr...@ops-netman.net> wrote: > > > > Draft Agenda was uploaded moments ago. > > > > I'm sure I missed

Re: [sidr] Agenda Upload

At Tue, 08 Nov 2016 14:26:28 +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > > i stil think we should be doing some rigorous interoperability testing, > inter CA, caches and routers, routers applying origin validation, ... > > yes, we should be doing this in sidrops, but we all know that it will be >

Re: [sidr] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-19.txt

At Sun, 27 Nov 2016 14:53:17 +, "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" wrote: > > This new version of the BGPsec specification draft incorporates > Alvaro's (Routing AD) comments. Another email follows that provides > responses to the comments and clarifies how each of

[sidr] Minutes from the meeting

Sidr folks: Are posted, all errors are the note taker's fault (me). If you see problems/corrections/additions I'll take diffs ... thanks! -chris ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

[sidr] Slides Slides Slides ... nom nom nom!

If your name is Joel or Randy ... you are either not planning to present slides, or you are going to get them to -chairs 'soon' (like in the next 2.5 hrs). thanks! -chris ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Re: [sidr] AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-10

i think the plan is to shift the -ops document (this one) to the sidrops group...I meant to ask about: "how do we do that?" I'll do that in person tonight. At Wed, 2 Nov 2016 15:35:18 +, "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" wrote: > > Randy: > > Hi! Thanks for working on this

[sidr] Jabber scribe + Notes Taker

Howdy folks, Before the meeting start :) Are there folk willing to volunteer 'now' for the event 'then'? :) we'll need both before start. -chris ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

[sidr] Jabber scribe + Notes Taker

Howdy folks, Before the meeting start :) Are there folk willing to volunteer 'now' for the event 'then'? :) we'll need both before start. -chris ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

[sidr] Meeting Slides

howdy sidr folks, as oer usual meeting-prep, our meeting is Thursday, if you are presenting I expect to have your slides by no later than wed evening 9pm (2100 local)... in PDF format. If you send 'not pdf' format, i'll convert them ... that is guaranteed to not end well for you :) it behooves

[sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016

Howdy WG folks! The authors of: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. The abstract for this

[sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol - 10/25/2016

Howdy WG Folks! Let's chat (email) about the subject document: draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol The authors believe they have dealt with all open items and are interested in moving this document forward to IESG for publication. Let's have a read/write/arithmetic time with the draft and send

[sidr] Seoul/IETF97 Meeting Agenda Request

howdy SIDR folk, So far there's 1 requested slot, we have possibly 2.5 hrs to discuss the goings-on of SIDR. Please send your agenda time requests forth-with! Please also make sure that your slides are available to the chairs by Monday morning (11/14/2016)... slides received after will be less

[sidr] Reminder that sidr is closing out, sidrops is the new thing!

I haven't checked the mailing list membership set for sidrops yet, but.. if you are planning to keep on discussing this problem space you may consider joining 'sidr...@ietf.org' so we can keep on keepin' on. Sidrops mailing list info: archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/

Re: [sidr] AD Review of sidr-origin-validation-signaling-09

At Wed, 30 Nov 2016 05:37:24 -0800, Randy Bush wrote: > > >>> and stitching back together the tcp session... same effect. > >> > >> Not sure why you have to stitch back together the TCP session? I > >> thought you were supposing the "attacker" was the edge node, it can > >> just

Re: [sidr] AD Review of sidr-origin-validation-signaling-09

At Tue, 29 Nov 2016 21:08:11 -0500, "John G. Scudder" <j...@juniper.net> wrote: > > On Nov 29, 2016, at 9:02 PM, Chris Morrow <morr...@ops-netman.net> wrote: > > Of course, just wiping out the prefixes in flight > > Right, exactly. The OV "attack&

Re: [sidr] AD Review of sidr-origin-validation-signaling-09

At Tue, 29 Nov 2016 20:23:55 -0500, "John G. Scudder" wrote: > > On Nov 13, 2016, at 1:40 AM, Alvaro Retana (aretana) > wrote: > > C1. The reference to rfc7607 should be Informative. > > Done (in -10 candidate source). > > > C2. [Major] Security

Re: [sidr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-12: (with COMMENT)

At Tue, 3 Jan 2017 09:39:07 +0100, Peter Hessler wrote: > > I'm currently not using bgpsec (or rpki for that matter). BUT, if there > was no path to go back, I would never ever use it. Destroying my ASN > because I wasn't ready to migrate is a straight-up No Go(tm). yup,

Re: [sidr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-12: (with COMMENT)

At Tue, 03 Jan 2017 00:33:49 +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > > hi mirja, > > > could there be a similar case here, where a router is known to support > > BGPsec and others would ignore/drop non-signed announcements? > > h. as far as i can remember, this has not actually been

Re: [sidr] Protocol Action: 'BGP Prefix Origin Validation State Extended Community' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling-11.txt)

At Sat, 04 Mar 2017 13:36:05 +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > > > The ext-comm may come from an ebgp neighbor. ebgp neighbor? the text talks about ibgp, and about explicitly ignoring ebgp senders of this community (by default). right? > > ok. saves a character. my kind of change

Re: [sidr] Protocol Action: 'BGP Prefix Origin Validation State Extended Community' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling-11.txt)

At Sat, 04 Mar 2017 13:05:11 +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > > > Section 2, 3rd paragraph: > > > > "Similarly on the receiving IBGP speakers, the validation > >state of an IBGP route SHOULD be derived directly from the last octet > >of the extended community, if present." >

Re: [sidr] Protocol Action: 'BGP Prefix Origin Validation State Extended Community' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling-11.txt)

At Sat, 04 Mar 2017 09:13:22 +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > > i am very confused. what is the actual problem here? > > if the community arrives at a router that has computed a validation > state from local data, the community's state must be ignored. > > does the spec need to be

Re: [sidr] AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-07

At Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:47:11 -0400, Rob Austein wrote: > > At Mon, 13 Mar 2017 14:16:59 +0800, Declan Ma wrote: > ... > > It seems to me that the only concern on OID is about using OPENSSL > > to get resource sets for further validation process. If the WG has > > decided to

Re: [sidr] AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-07

At Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:55:56 +0100, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote: > > Hi, > > So, to me it seems that having new OIDs makes perfect sense as long as > there is a choice of two validation algorithms. Then having an > explicit flag set by CAs tells RPs decide which way to go. Because of >

Re: [sidr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8360 (5638)

seems legit to me. At Wed, 13 Feb 2019 07:33:35 -0800 (PST), RFC Errata System wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8360, > "Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Validation Reconsidered". > > -- > You may review the report

Re: [sidr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6482 (5881)

this seems legit. On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 16:24:26 +, RFC Errata System wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6482, > "A Profile for Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs)". > > -- > You may review the report below and at: >

Re: [sidr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8360 (5870)

On Fri, 04 Oct 2019 16:25:45 -0400, RFC Errata System wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8360, > "Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Validation Reconsidered". > > -- > You may review the report below and at: >