On Oct 7, 2009, at 6:56 PM, Terry Manderson wrote:
My concern isn't about collision/overlap of ROAs at the bottom
of the RPKI hierarchy, that seems perfectly reasonably to me if
the operator so chooses.
But what decision should the relying party make? in other words how
does the
relying party know that collision was intentional?
I'd think it wouldn't matter with the RP, if the ROAs
are there then accept those prefixes from the specified
Origin AS - even if multiple - i.e., doesn't a valid
ROA imply it was intentional ;-)
I suspect, the only answer to this is a trusted TA repository that
blesses
the TAs so that all the Relying Parties can at least start from a
cogent
position. I can hear the groans of discomfort now.. :-)
Indeed..
-danny
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
