Hello.

I have a question:

RFC 6488 section 3.1.l (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6488#section-3)
wants relying parties (RPs) to validate that all RPKI signed objects
are DER-encoded, which (I think) means that they must be BER-encoded
with minimal and unique representations.

But I have found at least one other requirement that seems to
contradict this: RFC 6482 section 3.3, fourth paragraph, second half,
claims that a ROA (which is a signed object) is allowed to contain
redundant ROAIPAddress elements.

Furthermore, RFC 3779 (which is meaningfully referenced by the ROA and
RPKI certificate (6487) RFCs) states the following:

   relying parties do
   not need to sort the information, or to implement extra code in the
   subset checking algorithms to handle several boundary cases
   (adjacent, overlapping, or subsumed ranges).

Which seems to be paraphraseable as "RPs can parse signed objects as
if they were BER-encoded, without worrying about DER."

In fact, my reading of it is that the entirety of RFC 3779 seems to be
of the mind that IP and AS extension writers are intended to strictly
adhere to DER specifically for the sake of simplifying the task of
RPs. RFC 6488, on the other hand, wants both to be strict.

So what's the consensus?

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

Reply via email to