Speaking as regular ol’ member
On Oct 7, 2015, at 5:24 PM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote:

> We’ll need to figure out what to do about the I-D.sidr-as-migration reference 
> it’s in the “IESG Dead” state.
> 
> I guess s3.2 is going to match whatever updates are made to 
> bgpsec-protocol-14.
> 

Looking at that section, I think it matches the planned updates to the bgpsec 
protocol.

Ironically, I think it matches the planned updates more directly than it 
matches the current state of the bgpsec protocol, depending on how you read the 
exact wording.

     .  BGPsec_Path contains 3 signatures :
          o  Signature from AS 1 protecting

             192.0.2/24, AS 1 and AS 2

This will still be true in the updates, no problem.

          o  Signature from AS 2 protecting

             Everything AS 1's signature protected, and AS 3

Right now, the bgpsec protocol’s signature from AS 2 covers the signature from 
AS 1, not “Everything AS 1’s signature protected”.  Of course, by induction, 
that protects “Everything AS 1’s signature protected”.  So not wrong, just 
indirectly true.

The intent as I understand it of the updates to the bgpsec protocol are to make 
the signature from AS 2 cover and directly protect “Everything AS 1’s signature 
protected”.

IMHO.  You are an author, so…..

—Sandy, speaking as regular ol’ member

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

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

Reply via email to