Sure.

The relying party agreement is available at:

https://www.arin.net/resources/rpki/rpa.pdf

My concerns derive from the section PROHIBITED CONDUCT.

That section says it forbids the relying party (the one retrieving RPKI data 
from ARIN and validating wrt the ARIN trust anchor) from transferring, giving 
access to, copying, broadcasting, etc., any "related content". 

I think that could impact the envisioned architecture and dominant use cases,

 It also forbids "derivative works".

I think that could impact looking-glass-like or route-views-like public 
services, the many different sites that are reporting status and route 
validity, etc, so an impact on operational usability.

A couple of people have suggested mechanisms that might suit ARIN and minimize 
the impact and might be worth exploring.

At the ARIN meeting week before last, this was a topic of off-agenda 
discussions. I and others did have a chance to talk to top ARIN staff.  So they 
are aware.

And it is not intended to be a "bash-the-RIR" and certainly not a 
"-and-force-them-into-submission", since we have no authority over ARIN legal 
decisions.

--Sandy


________________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Danny 
McPherson [[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 1:29 PM
To: Murphy, Sandra
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [sidr] additions and changes to agenda on Friday

On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:35 PM, Murphy, Sandra wrote:
>
> I would like to open a discussion with the wg concerning the recently 
> announced ARIN relying party agreement.  I have concerns about this 
> agreement's impact on the envisioned RPKI architecture and dominant use.  I 
> think the wg needs to consider the potential impact and any potential 
> mechanisms that would lessen impact.  Note that the IETF can not interfere 
> with ARIN legal decisions!

Sandy,
Can you elaborate what your "concerns about this agreement's impact on the 
envisioned RPKI architecture and dominant use" are?  Do you have a reference or 
outline we can review prior to the discussion in order to keep this from being 
a bash-the-RIR-and-force-them-into-submission-for-trying-to-deploy-this-stuff 
fest?

Thanks,

-danny



_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Reply via email to