On Aug 22, 2012, at 10:41 PM, Danny McPherson wrote: > > Admittedly, I'm not certain what triggered this, but clearly, your email to > me suggests that others have expressed concern of consistency and collisions, > a concern expressed by the IAB as well. As such, I have a question below. > > On Aug 10, 2012, at 4:45 PM, Murphy, Sandra wrote: > >> speaking as regular ol' member >> >> About allocation <-> RPKI consistency >> >> The RPKI is a certification of resource holding. Because the allocation >> databases continue to also record allocations, there's duplication of >> information between the RPKI and the allocation databases. >> >> Having duplicate records of the same data always presents an issue of >> consistency. We know we have this issue (have known it from the beginning), >> any resource certification outside the allocation system would, so we need >> to work on how to handle it. >> >> Handling it is out-of-band. Consistency will be a matter of process, to >> ensure that allocation actions are bound to issuance of consistent CA >> certificates (if and when one is issued) and vice versa. Monitoring the two >> to spot inconsistencies will be another process. >> >> Duplicates may be valid. There may be reasons for multiple CA certificates >> being issued for exactly the same prefix space. Transfer (or at least the >> only method of transfer discussed in the wg) would result in multiple CA >> certificates being issued for exactly the same prefix space, for >> make-before-break purposes. >> >> We already have a potential for inconsistency. As noted in the IAB >> statement on the RPKI, multiple trust anchors present a risk of conflicting >> certifications for the same address block. We do not yet have a single root >> trust anchor. No need for panic, the RIRs are aware and I trust they have >> process in mind to ensure consistency. (This is a contentious issue - >> hopefully that's worded with sufficient care and balance.) But that's >> another case where consistency is/will be ensured by process. > > > Sandy (or others in the know), can you shed any light on the process you have > in mind to ensure consistency? Particularly from the perspective of a > prospective RP? Pointers to process (e.g., RIR processes in the works) are > fine.
Indeed, I vaguely recall some conversations (on the list?) about the specific consistency model that the RPKI is trying to achieve. I wasn't able to unearth the thread, but what was the conclusion? That is, what is the consistency model that the RPKI design team is striving for? Thanks, Eric _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
