I would like to see the WG discuss validation. I think there are inherent risks in the current model, which could be avoided if we had a more nuanced understanding of the validity of any given resource under consideration.
So as a co-author of this draft its hardly surprising I support adoption, because I want us to have a real conversation. -George, speaking as co-author of the draft. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Sandra Murphy <[email protected]> wrote: > The authors of draft-huston-rpki-validation-01.txt, RPKI Validation > Reconsidered, have requested wg adoption. > > See http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-huston-rpki-validation-01. > > Please do respond to the list as to whether you support the wg adopting > this as a work item. You do not need to comment on the content of this > draft at this time. You are asked to indicate if you think that this is > work that the wg should be doing and whether this draft is an acceptable > starting point. Adding whether you can/will review or not is useful. > > Note that active support is required for adoption. Silence is a vote > against adoption. > > This adoption call will end on 9 May 2014. > > --Sandy, speaking as wg co-chair > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr >
_______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
