Sriram, Kotikalapudi wrote (on 09-Jul-2011 at 14:30 +0100): > Chris Hall wrote: .... > >Strictly entre nous, I don't get a strong sense from the text that > >entering into such an arrangement is an obvious and foolish mistake > :-} .... > Having said that, I respect Randy's viewpoint (and yours -- seems > you are in agreement).
I was mostly paraphrasing the opinion which had been put to me quite strongly. >From where I sit, I would happily trust, say, the LINX. But I entirely take the point that a better system would not require me to depend entirely on trust; and someone new to the LINX might prefer not to. .... > We can revise Section 6.6 to put greater emphasis on the "cons" part > of it. I think that would be a most reasonable thing to do. Particularly, from the RS perspective, because Proxy Signing is (currently) how a Transparent BGPSEC RS might be implemented. The cons would be the basis for a case for some other solution, in the BGPSEC protocol, or elsewhere. Chris _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
