On 8/23/13 6:27 AM, Benno Overeinder wrote:
I am also in favour of pursuing this draft. I do see a benefit in
signing RPSL objects.
I understand the argument of Randy: with the keys in the RPKI one can
sign anything such as bank transactions, and indeed that doesn't mean we
have to do so. But RPSL objects are close to the practice of routing,
just like RPKI. And although technically they are different
infrastructures, operationally both technologies are used for
overlapping goals. I also see advantages for deployment and transition
strategies. And there are situations in which ISPs will keep using RPSL
and the added authoritative information from RPKI would be a great plus.
If the WG thinks this work should proceed, I am available as an
additional author/editor of the draft (given the current authors agree
with suggestion of chairs).
I have not talked to Robert about this, but I would be fine with letting
Benno help update the draft to take into account the WGLC comments.
Regards,
Brian
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
