From nobody Thu Sep 4 09:14:25 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 850961A88F3 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:14:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.664 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.664 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id owJaxTuCljiS for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from walnut.tislabs.com (walnut.tislabs.com [192.94.214.200]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E25DD1A034A for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nova.tislabs.com (unknown [10.66.1.77]) by walnut.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 157DB28B0017; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:12:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nova.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A831F8032; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:12:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Sandra Murphy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:12:23 -0400 Message-Id: <269FFD10-3A60-4173-AC26-026E9DA24ABE@parsons.com> To: sidr wg list Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/bbgieVr5KNMrsmqyNcNKSbuSt-k Cc: Sandra Murphy Subject: [sidr] due date for corrections to minutes or slides X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 16:14:23 -0000 Note that Monday, 8 Sep is the deadline for corrections to the minutes = or slides. If you see anything that needs to be missing or incorrect, please do = report it to the list. --Sandy From nobody Thu Sep 4 09:31:43 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51FC11A03B5 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:31:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.465 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.465 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ciYy1Kg7cHoD for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:31:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from walnut.tislabs.com (walnut.tislabs.com [192.94.214.200]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76D8E1A0380 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:31:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nova.tislabs.com (unknown [10.66.1.77]) by walnut.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B98F928B0017; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:31:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nova.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85BD31F8032; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:31:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Sandra Murphy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:31:36 -0400 Message-Id: <9CC235E3-CB3A-48FE-BEEE-0D9565B2A8B2@parsons.com> To: sidr wg list Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/02EW8GPILsPXHYVicTaWtY1UPUU Cc: Sandra Murphy Subject: [sidr] minutes note consensus on several topics X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 16:31:40 -0000 The minutes note consensus in the meeting on several topics. I'm = attempting to capture them here. The mailing list is always the final word on consensus. If you object = to any of the following, you should speak on list now! If I've missed something noted in the minutes, you should speak on the = list now! If you think there was consensus on a topic not noted in the minutes - = see previous message about the deadline for corrections. In the discussion of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol: consensus to remove origin validation check from this document and add text explaining the oddly appearing case of OV invalid, BGPSEC path authentic/valid. Discussion has not converged In the discussion of draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration: 1) What status should this document be? Concensus appeared to be the same status as BGPSEC =20 2) Should this document be merged into BGPSEC-Protocol Concensus appeared to be not to merge =20 3) Should this document "Update" BGPSEC-Protocol Concensus appeared to be that an update header is not needed if = both=20 In the discussion of Router Keying Communication of cert to CA: Concensus appeared to be that one ASN per router certificate is sufficient. --Sandy= From nobody Mon Sep 8 13:42:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EA0F1A0383 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 13:42:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OCGi6ffO2wWR for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 13:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A8D31A037F for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 13:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s88KZQ02026805 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 21:35:26 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (host4-182-static.10-188-b.business.telecomitalia.it [188.10.182.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s88KZO0f026773 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 21:35:25 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 21:41:59 +0100 Message-ID: <02be01cfcba5$570a7820$051f6860$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac/LpVTdzIJAAcxsQzuIKhBFzuhZXQ== Content-Language: en-gb X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-20938.002 X-TM-AS-Result: No--14.577-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--14.577-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: IuGQX3eS/ETZZ7BZ4UeyMAgKAWhuC2ojCckvlPjoBZErmF9M9Cpdo8Lm p4jPUF8tuenE8eLG9VRp6oZAI2DGjOyt+a9Mtf+eF6z9HGHKwNsk80hXoYXyazdnd59Af7CPs4t AEOEfosHYVph6DzTbB6EqQJ+9+hWw2DBKoUnK0AUdxBAG5/hkW17OZ6hrwwnzIdKvm2xilWAZmY UBcCKclec6r1u0yRCeA4OUKPk+wFgmfxOgBOFpInGBmLio+mJgifgN14P+4s3JyYU2J054Pbt6I p6ECVpCbYBtV6i2qU565rrWKXsbyBNj8dEIVpt0ngIgpj8eDcC063Wh9WVqgqbyPFGTn+O41GcR AJRT6POOhzOa6g8KrVjbiRFUE+ZvoAH2peRVB5pf5ykoVFbZN0fdg4Dhp/20KRpkOuxL+xc= Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/UqDipREl154-3PxMgMVxZUofrFI Subject: [sidr] Heads up: Last Call: (BGP operations and security) to Best Current Practice X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 20:42:07 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: IETF-Announce [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The > IESG > Sent: 08 September 2014 16:42 > To: IETF-Announce > Cc: opsec@ietf.org > Subject: Last Call: (BGP operations and > security) to Best Current Practice > > > The IESG has received a request from the Operational Security > Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure WG (opsec) to consider the > following document: > - 'BGP operations and security' > as Best Current Practice > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2014-09-22. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) is the protocol almost exclusively used > in the Internet to exchange routing information between network > domains. Due to this central nature, it is important to understand > the security measures that can and should be deployed to prevent > accidental or intentional routing disturbances. > > This document describes measures to protect the BGP sessions itself > (like TTL, TCP-AO, control plane filtering) and to better control the > flow of routing information, using prefix filtering and > automatization of prefix filters, max-prefix filtering, AS path > filtering, route flap dampening and BGP community scrubbing. > > > > > > The file can be obtained via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsec-bgp-security/ > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsec-bgp-security/ballot/ > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. From nobody Mon Sep 8 16:15:37 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B181E1A0343 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 16:15:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.553 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p7XgK86HbTCo for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 16:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from walnut.tislabs.com (walnut.tislabs.com [192.94.214.200]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A87391A0292 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 16:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nova.tislabs.com (unknown [10.66.1.77]) by walnut.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3EE128B0017 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:15:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nova.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE2BC1F8032; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:15:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Sandra Murphy Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_503525C3-DBAC-493D-B912-9DDBEAAA59C8"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Message-Id: <23C5CDEF-800E-4C27-98A1-CADB4E9ABB27@tislabs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:15:32 -0400 References: To: sidr wg list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/Eik3oMmTZK5jRLvMzDQ23Z3sVqk Cc: Sandra Murphy Subject: [sidr] Fwd: Last Call: (BGP operations and security) to Best Current Practice X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 23:15:35 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_503525C3-DBAC-493D-B912-9DDBEAAA59C8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Speaking as regular ol' member: The opsec bgp security draft is in IETF last call. John Scudder made an interesting observation, which looks of interest to = this group. --Sandy, regul=E4r ol' member Begin forwarded message: > From: "John G. Scudder" > Subject: Re: Last Call: (BGP = operations and security) to Best Current Practice > Date: September 8, 2014 5:05:53 PM EDT > To: "" = > Cc: opsec@ietf.org, ietf >=20 > On Sep 8, 2014, at 11:42 AM, The IESG wrote: >=20 >>=20 >> The IESG has received a request from the Operational Security >> Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure WG (opsec) to consider the >> following document: >> - 'BGP operations and security' >> as Best Current Practice >>=20 >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits >> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to = the >> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2014-09-22.=20 > ... >=20 > I happened to notice, in S. 6.1.2.4 (SIDR): >=20 > o If an ROA is not found then the prefix SHOULD be accepted but > corresponding route SHOULD be given a low preference. >=20 > The draft isn't precise about what's meant by "ROA is not found", but = probably it's the same as NotFound in RFC 7115 and 6811. Assuming that's = right, I'm curious what the rationale is for giving not-found routes a = low preference? By definition, they don't compete with a route that is = in any other state -- NotFound basically means there is no ROA that has = anything to say about this prefix at all, so all routes for this prefix = will be NotFound.=20 >=20 > The net result is according to the draft's recommendation all routes = for the prefix in question will be "accepted but ... given a low = preference". The recommendation ends up being mostly harmless, but also = not useful.=20 >=20 > (I say only *mostly* harmless since I guess some operator could be = confused into thinking they're more secure than they actually are.) >=20 > Sorry for the late comment. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > --John >=20 > P.S.: This shouldn't be construed as a full review of the document, = which I haven't done. --Apple-Mail=_503525C3-DBAC-493D-B912-9DDBEAAA59C8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUDjiUAAoJEHplpQeet0IZ0aEP/jPxVUPYyfwttGXH46qO94ka jxMENQCzrYxO/I9xzFWKuyWQESpKVsnUlBZowHqsXXaNbyhf4nDdNNzlK6Lgjmon h+BleXuYcGv+pJptPepqpSey4a16IHs8VHi6kQU0koAd5qYynsxibZV02o3ptBeX oUlKzNOakFfbrHY+ebtjRwPrSzSuXV3I2HbnT9+WTo2faIrJBs/0J1W0gFuRHhQX mcnNHZQHpcn2C69RcQ9TS37ytkvQCv50GVba0zsDlogZD8Ycy3HnC11UeI87L3ZR sBPikJ5UukcSz7ky+giULx+/ef5xZ60S4mL6Tzon/uA+LJIGlbFyIGjYdMBVP3fR iu0IXsf2n7G7leVM9pD2Lt/8RGp/dkF3BsdTe40Gtz78DalScAOC/ywTytTXli++ BQgIS3EDyCPMeqsUWBzg1OkeqGSZFDNd0N5Db02II0TXx93qU6p+koMOmcFTK6j0 8Xh7Vpg6DpXrsX8iXNAYpOVFefO6XMm/ySGgyg3LaRf+GDjbdnq/0UffoWsGtFWp 6pEuq/ji6GItvvKk/upX9aNeAe5ToMY9ku3YrxQ9a1mbqepNwXWdRvm2Pr9HHltu anF6306VCH3M1O4KzZ1xPz4uhyJ0hpTzsdO9N40u2h0Vfh+Y9Olk8iYUjvbM8ZGE cCA8yVczIXvgWy32d2kR =Yphu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_503525C3-DBAC-493D-B912-9DDBEAAA59C8-- From nobody Mon Sep 8 19:21:18 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE8771A03E4 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:21:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.552 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cKMBVmOcIe-V for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:21:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 338B41A03E9 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 19:21:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1XRB3Q-0001Gb-Rl; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 02:21:13 +0000 Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 11:21:11 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Sandra Murphy In-Reply-To: <23C5CDEF-800E-4C27-98A1-CADB4E9ABB27@tislabs.com> References: <23C5CDEF-800E-4C27-98A1-CADB4E9ABB27@tislabs.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/bcxLhxpxRDxMdb7PptnVfml73N8 Cc: sidr wg list Subject: Re: [sidr] Fwd: Last Call: (BGP operations and security) to Best Current Practice X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 02:21:15 -0000 > John Scudder made an interesting observation, which looks of interest > to this group. it has to happen occasionally, but jgs was not completely correct, as the author pointed out. From: Randy Bush Subject: Re: Last Call: (BGP operations and security) to Best Current Practice To: Jerome Durand Cc: "John G. Scudder" , , opsec , ietf Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 11:14:47 +0900 >> Assuming that's right, I'm curious what the rationale is for giving >> not-found routes a low preference? it was intended more as prefer valid. but i take your point. do remind me when we have gained enough experience to rev 7115 >> By definition, they don't compete with a route that is in any other >> state -- NotFound basically means there is no ROA that has anything >> to say about this prefix at all, so all routes for this prefix will >> be NotFound. true, if they are notfound, then they can not be either valid or invalid as there is no covering roa. > Actually I think the "lower preference" thing still makes some > sense. I still see the case where you receive the routes from > different peerings, for which you either check or do not check the > received prefix against the ROA. I can give the below example: you have a sick mind.:) yes, this is possible. so perhaps qualify the recommendation. in a configuration when some announcements may be checked and others not, it is possible that a prefix may be marked both notfound, because of not being checked, and [in]valid, because it is checked. in this configuration, we recommend that the operator prefer valid over notfound. randy From nobody Thu Sep 11 06:40:30 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5360A1A6F2D for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:40:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.954 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.954 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MZ-k7cLKShe5 for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:40:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.1.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 749001A6F2B for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:40:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dommiel.bbn.com ([192.1.122.15]:58782 helo=comsec.home) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1XS4c3-000Pt8-CV for sidr@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 09:40:39 -0400 Message-ID: <5411A647.90508@bbn.com> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 09:40:23 -0400 From: Stephen Kent User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sidr@ietf.org References: <9CC235E3-CB3A-48FE-BEEE-0D9565B2A8B2@parsons.com> In-Reply-To: <9CC235E3-CB3A-48FE-BEEE-0D9565B2A8B2@parsons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/le6m0UcIDNL7h867NTWhTvv14lA Subject: Re: [sidr] minutes note consensus on several topics X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 13:40:29 -0000 Sandy, > The minutes note consensus in the meeting on several topics. I'm attempting to capture them here. > > The mailing list is always the final word on consensus. If you object to any of the following, you should speak on list now! > > If I've missed something noted in the minutes, you should speak on the list now! > > If you think there was consensus on a topic not noted in the minutes - see previous message about the deadline for corrections. > > In the discussion of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol: > > consensus to remove origin validation > check from this document and add text explaining the oddly appearing > case of OV invalid, BGPSEC path authentic/valid. > > Discussion has not converged > > In the discussion of draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration: > > 1) What status should this document be? > Concensus appeared to be the same status as BGPSEC concur > > 2) Should this document be merged into BGPSEC-Protocol > Concensus appeared to be not to merge yes. > > 3) Should this document "Update" BGPSEC-Protocol > Concensus appeared to be that an update header is not needed if both missing text at the end? > > In the discussion of Router Keying Communication of cert to CA: > > Concensus appeared to be that one ASN per router certificate is > sufficient. agreed. Steve From nobody Fri Sep 12 04:29:39 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C772E1A06F3 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 04:29:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.553 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4eQ_nneeQaSR for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 04:29:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from walnut.tislabs.com (walnut.tislabs.com [192.94.214.200]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40BCA1A06DC for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 04:29:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nova.tislabs.com (unknown [10.66.1.77]) by walnut.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812A528B0040 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nova.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 555831F8032; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:34 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5FD6D31B-1920-4CEE-971C-FE186F9E2840"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) From: Sandra Murphy In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:33 -0400 Message-Id: References: <5C076C44-9200-4A07-A1BE-3888DCC9BC36@apnic.net> To: sidr wg list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/c_W4whVRPNG9xGrMHXz4cLQtIvw Cc: Sandra Murphy Subject: Re: [sidr] comments on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6485bis X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 11:29:38 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5FD6D31B-1920-4CEE-971C-FE186F9E2840 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii speaking as regular ol' member It has been some months. Sean Turner did respond to the last point. Is = there any comment from the authors? --Sandy, speaking as regular ol' member On May 20, 2014, at 1:49 PM, Sandra Murphy wrote: >=20 > Speaking as regular ol' member. >=20 > On Apr 21, 2014, at 11:55 PM, Geoff Huston wrote: >=20 >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 >>> Except that the signed object signature algorithm OID will be >>> rsaEncryption which I think is still PKCS#1v1.5, but is not in = section >>> 5 of rfc4055. =20 >>=20 >>=20 >> I am unsure what you mean here. Perhaps if you send what you think = the >> text should say it would be helpful. =20 >=20 > The comment is about the correctness of the reference. But that > should not have an impact on implementation, so I withdraw the > comment. >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 >> what about: >>=20 >> "The locations where algorithm object identifiers appear are:" >=20 > Works for me. >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 >=20 >> I think this was a failing in RFC6485 itself.=20 >=20 >> RFC6487 has forward pointers to RFC6485 in the algorithm section for >> PKCS , but the text in RFC64845 refers to "certificates, CRLs and >> signed objects". >>=20 >> Do you have alternative text to suggest here? >>=20 >=20 > Defending RFC6485: RFC6485 only had one OID to talk about, so any > reference to an OID could be assumed to be that one OID. So the > choice for cert requests might not have been direct in RFC6485, but > there was no ambiguity. >=20 > But, yes, with the added mention of new OIDs, the text retained from > RFC6485 is no longer clear about implementation of cert requests. >=20 > I suggest the following alternative text would make the choice clear. > The changes add cert requests where the choice for certs and CRLs is > mentioned. =20 >=20 > From: >=20 >=20 > * The signature algorithm used in certificates, CRLs, and signed > objects is RSA Public-Key Cryptography Standards (PKCS) #1 > Version 1.5 (sometimes referred to as "RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5") = from > Section 5 of [RFC4055]. >=20 > To: >=20 >=20 > * The signature algorithm used in certificates, CRLs, signed > objects, and certification requests is RSA Public-Key = Cryptography=20 > Standards (PKCS) #1 Version 1.5 (sometimes referred to as=20 > "RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5") from Section 5 of [RFC4055]. >=20 > From: >=20 > * The hashing algorithm used in certificates, CRLs, and signed > objects is SHA-256 [SHS] (see note below). Hashing algorithms > are not identified individually in certificates and CRLs, as > the identity of the hashing algorithm is combined with the > identity of the digital signature algorithm. >=20 > To: >=20 > * The hashing algorithm used in certificates, CRLs, signed > objects, and certification requests is SHA-256 [SHS]=20 > (see note below). Hashing algorithms are not identified=20 > individually in certificates, CRLs, and certificate requests > as the identity of the hashing algorithm is combined with=20 > the identity of the digital signature algorithm. >=20 > From: >=20 > For generating and verifying certificates, and CRLs the hashing and > digital signature algorithms are referred to together, i.e., "RSA > PKCS#1 v1.5 with SHA-256" or more simply "RSA with SHA-256". The > Object Identifier (OID) sha256WithRSAEncryption from [RFC4055] MUST > be used in this case. >=20 > To: >=20 > For generating and verifying certificates, CRLs, and certification > requests, the hashing and digital signature algorithms are referred=20= > to together, i.e., "RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 with SHA-256" or more simply = "RSA=20 > with SHA-256". The Object Identifier (OID) sha256WithRSAEncryption=20= > from [RFC4055] MUST be used in this case. >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= >=20 >=20 > A couple of typos in the new section 8 explaining the changes: >=20 > From: >=20 > Section 2 of [RFC6485] specified a single signature algorithm (SHA- > 256)=20 >=20 > To: >=20 > Section 2 of [RFC6485] specified a single signature algorithm (RSA > PKCS#1 v1.5) >=20 > (I'm guessing here what you mean, but I'm pretty sure the text did not > mean SHA-256 is a signature algorithm. It could also be that the > text meant: >=20 > To: >=20 > Section 2 of [RFC6485] specified a single signature algorithm (RSA > and a single hash algorithm (SHA-256)=20 >=20 > or ... something else?) >=20 > This section is an explanation of the change, so it is intended for > the IESG, and is not crucial to implementation. I think it would be > better to change to say what you mean, but I can accept it. >=20 > There's also this typo: >=20 > From: >=20 > This document changes Section 2 of [RFC4055]. >=20 > To: >=20 > This document changes Section 2 of [RFC6485]. >=20 > That also is not crucial to implementation, but it might confuse the > secretariat to have this text claim that the draft updates 4055. If > anyone notices. >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D >=20 >=20 >>> I presume accepting sha256WithRSAEncryption is backward = compatibiilty > ... >>=20 >> I am already hopelessly confused by this situation, and I'm in no >> position to answer this. >=20 > No one else has expressed any concern over the backward compatibility, > so I withdraw the comment. >=20 >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 > Then there's this new bit, which I noticed in the midst of checking > what was needed for the certificate requests. >=20 >=20 > In Section 2, the text says >=20 > In a certification request, the OID appears in the PKCS #10 > signatureAlgorithm field [RFC2986], or in the Certificate Request > Message Format (CRMF) POPOSigningKey signature field [RFC4211]. >=20 > RFC4211 says that the POPOSigningKey is: >=20 > POPOSigningKey ::=3D SEQUENCE { > poposkInput [0] POPOSigningKeyInput OPTIONAL, > algorithmIdentifier AlgorithmIdentifier, > signature BIT STRING } >=20 > I'm pretty sure the text should say the OID goes in the POPOSigningKey > algorithmIdentifier field, not the POPOSigningKey signature field. >=20 > [[While this looks clear to me, the comment could use some review by > someone comfortable with ASN.1 overloaded and inconsistent field > names.]] >=20 > That text is in the original RFC6485 and it has no relationship with = the > problem with the OID choice in CMS, the reason for this bis. >=20 > However, if true, this has implementation impact, so I think this > should be considered at some point. >=20 > *IF* people agree that this is wrong, do the authors have any > problem with changing the text in this bis? >=20 > FROM: >=20 > Message Format (CRMF) POPOSigningKey signature field [RFC4211]. >=20 > TO: >=20 > Message Format (CRMF) POPOSigningKey algorithmIdentifier field=20 > [RFC4211]. >=20 > --Sandy, speaking as regular ol' member >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr --Apple-Mail=_5FD6D31B-1920-4CEE-971C-FE186F9E2840 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUEtkdAAoJEHplpQeet0IZvhsP/0bfr5FZdiOtgMSi5Voc3mcy HsfROuVEBUFcUHu/8HrM/iKxUYtOc31Mw4p5VvoNZQOxPZScemnOzXD5IB3Zx5Xj 8MdRCe5yDHS8NJAgLM60a4hR7Zb195Z9tU+LXVEYl8MPcUwdDGQuCdf7EkWoq79Q zpShN3FkC2y4S6t+IY5RIGs8lE6pKsX42UvyjUmm9HIInVYybCrAeaOHbiKZLrLL U8GSU3RRHH9NTPFAL/KXiGYAOKRgY7NWmmWr4I5mGpGzrpNmhuLBpCCG6ZrwDEme 2A49ZI0vKjtcAfTbf5Yi1/3unoBVWg38WvfPFCSFDoiDSiPHbNIelNqOXpJm+GQu yEShjfHAETGiPXj3fY4jp1EWo/E0WSOPR83sFyZqQbsw32wONieSNsJZ1Q5wmDat zX1pUsvzL0afMHr8bM9u51PPtHULFWqlSCgecuUJEUUUGvHbyajyxHQgsc4CDmHm J8X7QCKc5vkSbPZh8NkLycuqXYvIIEI5szpJWi0Ospiyndi1jFbGh7qnJhwO0IXS 4esfclrj5mM58cwoEvAViRdCUkpUTqdGS2an65a3Yn379nuIcnaWJlXfqFv9wnmj /M4GSqSiYZE2iixQkryxYT2R2m/r6Zbc/VT5JmTGZoYupsvmDWM/LnZ+hG7Oig// OLfzwf3fLk/AgqXCRm8/ =4zmC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_5FD6D31B-1920-4CEE-971C-FE186F9E2840-- From nobody Fri Sep 12 07:29:19 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05BCE1A6F12 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.526 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.526 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FRT_ADULT2=1.474, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wQm_YnrUVOeq for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-x22c.google.com (mail-vc0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA2FF1A06CA for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id hy10so755278vcb.31 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=FJJGS3KuUJtM3ho9dsMLk6UpHrvn9V+wSQjvCEYENe0=; b=KhzpPc6jQGobVpfv4bqC0vadBZLAGvT+ENtLIWU4lP+q81LeitaDnTsSWgJGqQaHeF JGGS2Q1wPAKhY8ZLTj15lk5Cr+IaEdgsI53PiUQ1hCTQ4/G0PtzYsbFTQUhYBBohehgj SnwC9d88Aquxtxm6uFmspBwd5l+CBEcfG2v15HoEM5c+s3jm7wPmYg2oFeNYZ/tJg4BA V8sdJZvG9GJRVQEQSgif/IjGAhXW66lIz0UbrGSgTgwb7FmDURhNjarMeg3RLJ8ZO4hJ htkYswrSQCsZ+mVSh/Nb9TPzBKi8pRVTmKs/Go5YWpPT6JTeAD1OoQAfmw4XqEpaVVIh bI2A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.34.104 with SMTP id y8mr5874546vdi.37.1410532154844; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:14 -0700 (PDT) Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.220.167.137 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:29:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <53FF40A8.5020100@ops-netman.net> References: <53FF40A8.5020100@ops-netman.net> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 10:29:14 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 34zVr4T7YUvL_vAqy8264WWNFNU Message-ID: From: Christopher Morrow To: Chris Morrow Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/5_nbt65UrmkhJHhgmkssMQg1kwo Cc: "sidr@ietf.org" , "sidr-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 14:29:17 -0000 Boo! people ought to read and write.. it's friday! take some time to review and make sure there's not like mistakes and stuff in this, eh? :) (please? :) ) -chris On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Chris Morrow wrote: > Howdy SIDR folken, > It's time again to dust off your spectacles and dive into a wonderous > world of 'potential RFC' reading material!! > > It'd be great if we could start this WGLC today: > 8/28/2014 or > August 28 2014 or > the 240th day of this year 2014 > > and end it in 2 weeks time on: > 9/11/2014 > September 11, 2014 > the 254th day of this year 2014 > > > for the draft in the subject line: draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration > the abstract of which is copied herein for your convenience: > > "This draft discusses considerations and methods for supporting and > securing a common method for AS-Migration within the BGPSec > protocol." > > > This document's pair is in IDR WGLC at this time as well, that document is: > > > happy reading and please send comments/concerns/adulation to the list. > > -chris > wg-co-chair > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Thu Sep 18 09:48:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 810151A0347 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:48:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.526 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.526 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FRT_ADULT2=1.474, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H7Tuqkopjupl for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:48:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-x22f.google.com (mail-vc0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 601221A02EB for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:48:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id hq11so960269vcb.6 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:48:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=muZoUjJadI2KWzs6bfB/4xxa33PApdc9TTlElWdIaeE=; b=i0deVfdM7pSD71Ybm8LIU5+xkgfZffgYbkRiWmO4/lx+B80btRzxlIDwaIXP8bQED6 fAf6Z8iFN3Y8qaF7IXLNYrVo0bkenRnU9THwSZfGunQ92UcvMLqhYm8W1X/Ys7/aFAfG cvm0QV29B0lv9WfZbDPEj30b8+ivuaaON9VHqFReLwJ5vvHnkOzI70YKMlEQ3HMbygk9 SLk7obD3PkLEIz8FBwaqProIhJ1N6LJK7Pk8bMGP+IJMwmLsBpEyqyOUpkwfwSB0l96b o/zQ9rlgK3LEz0/JO9Wseq9wWZoDYVHarVkvfUaf0jiD0/SCDvrZ0TRrHdvseHMM2Xxw NBEw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.186.196 with SMTP id ct4mr365664vcb.51.1411058930464; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:48:50 -0700 (PDT) Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.220.156.143 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:48:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53FF40A8.5020100@ops-netman.net> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 12:48:50 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: pbwWZyFSTDpzVS5cKpEYoknA860 Message-ID: From: Christopher Morrow To: Chris Morrow Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/eLlZ27aA2N41akv0kOVTItlgYcc Cc: "sidr@ietf.org" , "sidr-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:48:52 -0000 Helo from sidr-co-chair: Are there no more comments and concerns and improvements and "Hey, awesome draft!" things to be said about this draft? With no input it's a tad hard to judge the quality of the draft and it's applicability to SIDR in general... -chris (note, I've read the draft and think it's helpful to migrating operational networks together... in a land where SIDR is in play) On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > Boo! people ought to read and write.. it's friday! take some time to > review and make sure there's not like mistakes and stuff in this, eh? > :) > > (please? :) ) > > -chris > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Chris Morrow wrote: >> Howdy SIDR folken, >> It's time again to dust off your spectacles and dive into a wonderous >> world of 'potential RFC' reading material!! >> >> It'd be great if we could start this WGLC today: >> 8/28/2014 or >> August 28 2014 or >> the 240th day of this year 2014 >> >> and end it in 2 weeks time on: >> 9/11/2014 >> September 11, 2014 >> the 254th day of this year 2014 >> >> >> for the draft in the subject line: draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration >> the abstract of which is copied herein for your convenience: >> >> "This draft discusses considerations and methods for supporting and >> securing a common method for AS-Migration within the BGPSec >> protocol." >> >> >> This document's pair is in IDR WGLC at this time as well, that document is: >> >> >> happy reading and please send comments/concerns/adulation to the list. >> >> -chris >> wg-co-chair >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sidr mailing list >> sidr@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Thu Sep 18 19:23:39 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7E981A9141 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 19:23:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.552 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3YNSg5zoJk-m for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 19:23:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12A851A913F for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 19:23:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1XUnr2-0007MM-L4; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 02:23:25 +0000 Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 11:23:22 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Christopher Morrow In-Reply-To: References: <53FF40A8.5020100@ops-netman.net> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/MaB6IE_z26quichYt7zFBKdVbBU Cc: sidr-ads , sidr chairs , sidr wg list Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 02:23:30 -0000 i think i already said this. but i have reviewed. the scheme is solid. the document is in scale to the scope of the problem (unfortunately not simple). ship it. randy From nobody Thu Sep 18 20:17:35 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE96D1A913B for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:17:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.079 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.079 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FRT_ADULT2=1.474, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ikg7RMmNRoQQ for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:17:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-2.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 733DF1A6FC8 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:17:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.847.32; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:17:07 -0700 Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.0847.030; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:17:07 -0700 From: Terry Manderson To: Christopher Morrow , Chris Morrow Thread-Topic: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration Thread-Index: AQHPws7cwORZOufMxEKspF0HQX2NHZv+G5UAgAmU/gCAAVcqAA== Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 03:17:06 +0000 Message-ID: References: <53FF40A8.5020100@ops-netman.net> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.4.140807 x-originating-ip: [111.223.127.96] Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="B_3493977424_55738657" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/5zBXVwaP12at44SarGSOXRbEj0Y Cc: "sidr-ads@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 03:17:32 -0000 --B_3493977424_55738657 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit The document is stable, and well written. I re-read it (even with jetlagged eyes) and saw nothing that caused concern. The corollary, and as mentioned in the draft, is that without _really_ understanding the companion document in IDR any attempts to pick this text up to read as a standalone is pointless. I think this document can move forward. T. On 19/09/2014 2:48 am, "Christopher Morrow" wrote: >Helo from sidr-co-chair: >Are there no more comments and concerns and improvements and "Hey, >awesome draft!" things to be said about this draft? > >With no input it's a tad hard to judge the quality of the draft and >it's applicability to SIDR in general... > >-chris >(note, I've read the draft and think it's helpful to migrating >operational networks together... in a land where SIDR is in play) > >On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Christopher Morrow > wrote: >> Boo! people ought to read and write.. it's friday! take some time to >> review and make sure there's not like mistakes and stuff in this, eh? >> :) >> >> (please? :) ) >> >> -chris >> >> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Chris Morrow >>wrote: >>> Howdy SIDR folken, >>> It's time again to dust off your spectacles and dive into a wonderous >>> world of 'potential RFC' reading material!! >>> >>> It'd be great if we could start this WGLC today: >>> 8/28/2014 or >>> August 28 2014 or >>> the 240th day of this year 2014 >>> >>> and end it in 2 weeks time on: >>> 9/11/2014 >>> September 11, 2014 >>> the 254th day of this year 2014 >>> >>> >>> for the draft in the subject line: draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration >>> the abstract of which is copied herein for your convenience: >>> >>> "This draft discusses considerations and methods for supporting and >>> securing a common method for AS-Migration within the BGPSec >>> protocol." >>> >>> >>> This document's pair is in IDR WGLC at this time as well, that >>>document is: >>> >>> >>> happy reading and please send comments/concerns/adulation to the list. >>> >>> -chris >>> wg-co-chair >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sidr mailing list >>> sidr@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > >_______________________________________________ >sidr mailing list >sidr@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr --B_3493977424_55738657 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIITvAYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIITrTCCE6kCAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMAsGCSqGSIb3DQEHAaCC EYgwggcDMIIF66ADAgECAhAPz2lJUZsAlD35l4oJxf0FMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMGIxCzAJ BgNVBAYTAlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2VydCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2Vy dC5jb20xITAfBgNVBAMTGERpZ2lDZXJ0IEFzc3VyZWQgSUQgQ0EtMTAeFw0xMjAzMjcwMDAw MDBaFw0xNTAzMjcxMjAwMDBaMIGsMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzETMBEGA1UECBMKQ2FsaWZvcm5p YTEXMBUGA1UEBxMOTWFyaW5hIGRlbCBSZXkxPDA6BgNVBAoTM0ludGVybmV0IENvcnBvcmF0 aW9uIGZvciBBc3NpZ25lZCBOYW1lcyBhbmQgTnVtYmVyczEXMBUGA1UECxMORE5TIE9wZXJh dGlvbnMxGDAWBgNVBAMTD1RlcnJ5IE1hbmRlcnNvbjCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEP ADCCAQoCggEBAKRhZ4W3U6MnfS2woYEFCIyN+g1MNILokbUKk+PTl5mmK3QtWQxTSOu2sdzN xHMy6p2RoT9BMGOamttFq2WswSru6/7JT1TflytGaPHfK5kMP/pI47hmcwUEm9Z169I5ar7z BTiEAQA06cGKtgJ8XiiLFUIHLVuRq3WGxjnFTHlAHXY6mdgDT/ntAnoEvvPVm4XqUnjJiZTS ojzyr1q2RqFvyXs2blOARumDqvLI33yLGcUuaEL+A+hgodzM/fL4kdoy964mXvmEerpm4d4f Y/JfbRUWxc0Eomu9nwGFNk6ijO41qk+OIboct2qeA+5PPclXJNNHYVfzT2dyWfGgxaMCAwEA AaOCA2gwggNkMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFBUAEisTmLKZB+0e36K+Vw0rZwLNMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSz wvR2YXpP9XjS9cknMX5g3LM2jTAkBgNVHREEHTAbgRl0ZXJyeS5tYW5kZXJzb25AaWNhbm4u b3JnMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIFoDAdBgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEFBQcDBAYIKwYBBQUHAwIwfQYD VR0fBHYwdDA4oDagNIYyaHR0cDovL2NybDMuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0RpZ2lDZXJ0QXNzdXJl ZElEQ0EtMS5jcmwwOKA2oDSGMmh0dHA6Ly9jcmw0LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9EaWdpQ2VydEFz c3VyZWRJRENBLTEuY3JsMIIBxQYDVR0gBIIBvDCCAbgwggG0BgpghkgBhv1sBAECMIIBpDA6 BggrBgEFBQcCARYuaHR0cDovL3d3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vc3NsLWNwcy1yZXBvc2l0b3J5 Lmh0bTCCAWQGCCsGAQUFBwICMIIBVh6CAVIAQQBuAHkAIAB1AHMAZQAgAG8AZgAgAHQAaABp AHMAIABDAGUAcgB0AGkAZgBpAGMAYQB0AGUAIABjAG8AbgBzAHQAaQB0AHUAdABlAHMAIABh AGMAYwBlAHAAdABhAG4AYwBlACAAbwBmACAAdABoAGUAIABEAGkAZwBpAEMAZQByAHQAIABD AFAALwBDAFAAUwAgAGEAbgBkACAAdABoAGUAIABSAGUAbAB5AGkAbgBnACAAUABhAHIAdAB5 ACAAQQBnAHIAZQBlAG0AZQBuAHQAIAB3AGgAaQBjAGgAIABsAGkAbQBpAHQAIABsAGkAYQBi AGkAbABpAHQAeQAgAGEAbgBkACAAYQByAGUAIABpAG4AYwBvAHIAcABvAHIAYQB0AGUAZAAg AGgAZQByAGUAaQBuACAAYgB5ACAAcgBlAGYAZQByAGUAbgBjAGUALjB3BggrBgEFBQcBAQRr MGkwJAYIKwYBBQUHMAGGGGh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTBBBggrBgEFBQcwAoY1 aHR0cDovL2NhY2VydHMuZGlnaWNlcnQuY29tL0RpZ2lDZXJ0QXNzdXJlZElEQ0EtMS5jcnQw DAYDVR0TAQH/BAIwADANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAYpwxK/KvdhbyQqrKp2ylMQpNzqVH ofo4hPILTnp/o+UyYVn6daWSilaV+XNBzE5Rm/f7ms2iA1zBzOvGv55pLH0n6lgIRTeuAGzf KIsPCwPvYQkkMAPXHzh9A44m19hvigTgOPNyjzcOTiHqwwCJSDTEZx17CEkrzQPq1vfG1Lvk +AWjEtxCsGmsuCHHaZjwQ8SsGI7W5cA1Y4RTcQf6S9eIpSsOwXIYdDgWq9Uhi/amW7ryW06Y GH7BHaitqgmm32MZuid3UzJUU6+Ljx7uGA9Fe6k1uPEHhaXTAoobPSpPdOgGmnxUCRQu2OI7 +I8vHiSe7DC/LmxEDC5kB+lUTjCCBsIwggWqoAMCAQICEAoE3yF0XU0rjOozcgUAUOkwDQYJ KoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcG A1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBS b290IENBMB4XDTA2MTExMDAwMDAwMFoXDTIxMTExMDAwMDAwMFowYjELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMx FTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEhMB8G A1UEAxMYRGlnaUNlcnQgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBDQS0xMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8A MIIBCgKCAQEA6IItmfnKwkKVpYBzQHDSnlZUXKnE0kEGj8kz/E1FkVyBn+0snPgWWd+etSQV wpi5tHdJ3InECtqvy15r7a2wcTHrzzpADEZNk+yLejYIA6sMNP4YSYL+x8cxSIB8HqIPkg5Q ycaH6zY/2DDD/6b3+6LNb3Mj/qxWBZDwMiEWicZwiPkFl32jx0PdAug7Pe2xQaPtP77blUjE 7h6z8rwMK5nQxl0SQoHhg26Ccz8mSxSQrllmCsSNvtLOBq6thG9IhJtPQLnxTPKvmPv2zkBd XPao8S+v7Iki8msYZbHBc63X8djPHgp0XEK4aH631XcKJ1Z8D2KkPzIUYJX9BwSiCQIDAQAB o4IDbzCCA2swDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgGGMDsGA1UdJQQ0MDIGCCsGAQUFBwMBBggrBgEFBQcD AgYIKwYBBQUHAwMGCCsGAQUFBwMEBggrBgEFBQcDCDCCAcYGA1UdIASCAb0wggG5MIIBtQYL YIZIAYb9bAEDAAQwggGkMDoGCCsGAQUFBwIBFi5odHRwOi8vd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbS9z c2wtY3BzLXJlcG9zaXRvcnkuaHRtMIIBZAYIKwYBBQUHAgIwggFWHoIBUgBBAG4AeQAgAHUA cwBlACAAbwBmACAAdABoAGkAcwAgAEMAZQByAHQAaQBmAGkAYwBhAHQAZQAgAGMAbwBuAHMA dABpAHQAdQB0AGUAcwAgAGEAYwBjAGUAcAB0AGEAbgBjAGUAIABvAGYAIAB0AGgAZQAgAEQA aQBnAGkAQwBlAHIAdAAgAEMAUAAvAEMAUABTACAAYQBuAGQAIAB0AGgAZQAgAFIAZQBsAHkA aQBuAGcAIABQAGEAcgB0AHkAIABBAGcAcgBlAGUAbQBlAG4AdAAgAHcAaABpAGMAaAAgAGwA aQBtAGkAdAAgAGwAaQBhAGIAaQBsAGkAdAB5ACAAYQBuAGQAIABhAHIAZQAgAGkAbgBjAG8A cgBwAG8AcgBhAHQAZQBkACAAaABlAHIAZQBpAG4AIABiAHkAIAByAGUAZgBlAHIAZQBuAGMA ZQAuMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wfQYIKwYBBQUHAQEEcTBvMCQGCCsGAQUFBzABhhhodHRw Oi8vb2NzcC5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20wRwYIKwYBBQUHMAKGO2h0dHA6Ly93d3cuZGlnaWNlcnQu Y29tL0NBQ2VydHMvRGlnaUNlcnRBc3N1cmVkSURSb290Q0EuY3J0MIGBBgNVHR8EejB4MDqg OKA2hjRodHRwOi8vY3JsMy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vRGlnaUNlcnRBc3N1cmVkSURSb290Q0Eu Y3JsMDqgOKA2hjRodHRwOi8vY3JsNC5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20vRGlnaUNlcnRBc3N1cmVkSURS b290Q0EuY3JsMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQVABIrE5iymQftHt+ivlcNK2cCzTAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRF 66Kv9JLLgjEtUYunpyGd823IDzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAhGFOQR64dgQqtbbvj/JV hbldVv4KmObkvWWKfUAp0/yxXUX9OrgqWzNLJFzNubTkc61hXXatdDOKZtUjr0wfcm5F2XVA u6I7z41JL8BBsOIpo1E4Q1CZFKwzBjViiX13qVIH5WwgV7aBum+8s8KU7XYCgNl8zoWoHOzH Q0pLsVfPcs7f9SU8yyJP/Z9S0TfLCLs4PuDVPm95Ca1bfDGzdzXD5GP5aAqYB+dGOHeE0j6X vAqgqKwlT0RukeHSWq9r7zAcjaNEQrMQiyP61+Y1dDesz+urWB/JiCP/NtQH6jRqR+qdlWye KU9T7eMrlSBOKs+WYHr4LIDwlVLOKZaBYjCCA7cwggKfoAMCAQICEAzn4OUX2Eb+j+Vg/Bvw MDkwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwZTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IElu YzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNvbTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgQXNzdXJl ZCBJRCBSb290IENBMB4XDTA2MTExMDAwMDAwMFoXDTMxMTExMDAwMDAwMFowZTELMAkGA1UE BhMCVVMxFTATBgNVBAoTDERpZ2lDZXJ0IEluYzEZMBcGA1UECxMQd3d3LmRpZ2ljZXJ0LmNv bTEkMCIGA1UEAxMbRGlnaUNlcnQgQXNzdXJlZCBJRCBSb290IENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0B AQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEArQ4VzuRDgFyxh/O3YPlxEqWu3CaUiKr0zvUgOShYYAz4gNqp FZUyYTy1sSiEiorcnwoMgxd6j5Csiud5U1wxhCr2D5gyNnbM3t08qKLvavsh8lJh358g1x/i sdn+GGTSEltf+VgYNbxHzaE2+Wt/1LA4PsEbw4wz2dgvGP4oD7Ong9bDbkTAYTWWFv5ZnIt2 bdfxoksNK/8LctqeYNCOkDXGeFWHIKHP5W0KyEl8MZgzbCLph9AyWqK6E4IR7TkXnZk6cqHm +qTZ1Rcxda6FfSKuPwFGhvYoecix2uRXF8R+HA6wtJKmVrO9spftqqfwt8WoP5UW0P+hlusI Xxh3TwIDAQABo2MwYTAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAYYwDwYDVR0TAQH/BAUwAwEB/zAdBgNVHQ4E FgQUReuir/SSy4IxLVGLp6chnfNtyA8wHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUReuir/SSy4IxLVGLp6chnfNt yA8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBAKIOvN/i7fDjcnN6ZJS/93Jm2DLkQnVirofr8tXZ3laz n8zOFCi5DZdgXBJMWOTTPYNJRViXNWkaqEfqVsZ5qxLYZ4GE338JPJTmuCYsIL09syiJ91// IuKXhB/pZe+H4N/BZ0mzXeuyCSrrJu14vn0/K/O3JjVtX4kBtklbnwEFm6s9JcHMtn/C8W+G xvpkaOuBLZTrQrf6jB7dYvG+UGe3bL3z8R9rDDYHFn83fKlbbXrxEkZgg9cnBL5Lzpe+w2cq aBHfgOcMM2a/Ew0UbvN/H2MQHvqNGyVtbI+lt2EBsdKjJqEQcZ2t4sP5w5lRtysHCM4u5lCy p/oKRS+i8PIxggH8MIIB+AIBATB2MGIxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRUwEwYDVQQKEwxEaWdpQ2Vy dCBJbmMxGTAXBgNVBAsTEHd3dy5kaWdpY2VydC5jb20xITAfBgNVBAMTGERpZ2lDZXJ0IEFz c3VyZWQgSUQgQ0EtMQIQD89pSVGbAJQ9+ZeKCcX9BTAJBgUrDgMCGgUAoF0wIwYJKoZIhvcN AQkEMRYEFM9eOPVTIC9kDgVQCCDkpV+sfORpMBgGCSqGSIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEw HAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTE0MDkxOTAzMTcwNFowDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEAesN1BC10 6NNlF5or51t8kj3lvovdYX6/zK/WgW1lvQoi1yZawANJ7E7MX53SCkGCoCGcH9lKPObV+Pxz 3XpiJV36bgdVGejVhoif2UYIzdXQjvtmVESDkxEHqNzRFtHpfH2QCQaOqMuN1FqsZSmWsW0o EZeSduEb0wBEIVnRDK8bdWL7Itxcl8NJYXcvWkO7In0o8M3hjAaxoLsqzD8gFhafhzgoqAy1 vpRoVndnHk3tY9PR74HgDZzPSTWKVHCtur5SHBX7+bfVlSwSz9XhoQEXCpyCS3CYbk++7unu lpPIcV40/y70I1OMHdOHuOOz8JPQXYPgfvu1CYw3szjf/w== --B_3493977424_55738657-- From nobody Thu Sep 18 20:46:35 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84CE71A6FD9; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:46:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 55ZHMaKwGkRL; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 710461A023F; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:46:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.6.2.p6 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20140919034628.23926.33929.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:46:28 -0700 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/KCkujXIA7DfDy_HEJQx0yRm49mE Cc: sidr@ietf.org Subject: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 03:46:30 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Secure Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. Title : Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator Authors : Geoff Huston Samuel Weiler George Michaelson Stephen Kent Filename : draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2014-09-18 Abstract: This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource Certificate Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis/ There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Fri Sep 19 06:31:12 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56F2B1A0181 for ; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 06:31:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.485 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.485 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jZ57Rwc_AsKu for ; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 06:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de [130.133.4.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF6A51A0175 for ; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 06:31:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.82) for sidr@ietf.org with esmtp (envelope-from ) id <1XUyH8-002d00-1e>; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:31:02 +0200 Received: from g231226170.adsl.alicedsl.de ([92.231.226.170] helo=mw-PC.fritz.box) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.82) for sidr@ietf.org with esmtpsa (envelope-from ) id <1XUyH7-000ol8-UW>; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:31:02 +0200 Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:29:19 +0200 From: Matthias Waehlisch To: sidr wg list Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (WNT 1167 2008-08-23) X-X-Sender: waehl@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Originating-IP: 92.231.226.170 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/eRtb6wn-z4DD2ahoajW2m_Nomz8 Subject: [sidr] Survey about RPKI/DNSSEC X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 13:31:10 -0000 Folks, we, a group of researchers, try to better understand the deployment of RPKI and DNSSEC. It's not always easy to find technical reasons for what we observe. To get more insights why you deploy or don't deploy RPKI or DNSSEC, we would like to ask you to participate in the following brief survey: http://eSurv.org?u=rpkidnssec We really appreciate your time. It should not take more than 5 minutes to complete the survey. The survey is anonymous. The results are only used to improve research on inter-networking. If there is interest, we will post the results to the list. Fell free to contact me offlist in case of further questions or comments. Many thanks! matthias (on behalf of the team) [This email has also been sent to RIPE and NANOG folks.] -- Matthias Waehlisch . Freie Universitaet Berlin, Inst. fuer Informatik, AG CST . Takustr. 9, D-14195 Berlin, Germany .. mailto:waehlisch@ieee.org .. http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/~waehl :. Also: http://inet.cpt.haw-hamburg.de .. http://www.link-lab.net From nobody Wed Sep 24 12:28:52 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 886541A0367; Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:28:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BDWb8dgF1q8C; Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x231.google.com (mail-qc0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3FE51A0351; Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:28:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id x13so4040286qcv.36 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:28:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pLetHJDdiHmeyHD2rBWgYnn2dgvP+nHYm6w8bbCYIfI=; b=Kik6ur+/OcKHI4ti8Nb/IKilv0cRz+05P7rj5Yzf3GP5GaehpiB/zNWvEwCdcj7zVJ ZULmLRycuW8U5wQegNHGh1DNRSwcvJRxB59rSuh2fegwBKbJEuw2J41VQnubvjxxp2K4 BcH1e9nE5QZ06XVFtja1vFU3XkofzoO9skP5bqWBIXZ3sb0KcAJQT2uHhU3S+RzqqP6X Zva70I9IGeMzBycJUtdxk5wemcUHJ72ZELNP+gabGCKW0gJvGVefEL+o8sNm90EhQmQj f4b5kC/kEYyBQXNpHWpuqRHzCx5OhkWYdicUNUfbOP0IoIpSpHrLjFxZgEEo8i+nbu58 i7jA== X-Received: by 10.140.89.105 with SMTP id u96mr12653823qgd.74.1411586908000; Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:28:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from albion.local ([200.7.87.95]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f46sm172063qgd.21.2014.09.24.12.28.25 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <54231B57.3070508@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:28:23 -0300 From: "Carlos M. Martinez" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internet-drafts@ietf.org, i-d-announce@ietf.org References: <20140919034628.23926.33929.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20140919034628.23926.33929.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/GTJWkj5Lmk8GJI0l2FxTC91xACM Cc: sidr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: carlos@lacnic.net List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 19:28:30 -0000 A couple of comments here: - I have the feeling that it'd be good to begin referring to locators as just 'URIs' instead of insisting on them being 'rsync URIs'. If the group ever decides to address the subject of repository transport, and since we are revisiting 6490, we might save little work down the road. - A two or more URI example would be a good addition. regards Carlos On 19/09/2014 00:46, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Secure Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator > Authors : Geoff Huston > Samuel Weiler > George Michaelson > Stephen Kent > Filename : draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt > Pages : 9 > Date : 2014-09-18 > > Abstract: > This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource > Certificate Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis/ > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > From nobody Fri Sep 26 07:17:42 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A201A88E4 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:17:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.687 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.687 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DLnFdIJS23ET for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from walnut.tislabs.com (walnut.tislabs.com [192.94.214.200]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A80B1A88F7 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:17:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nova.tislabs.com (unknown [10.66.1.77]) by walnut.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B60E328B003D for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 10:17:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nova.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99A811F8032; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 10:17:28 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) From: Sandra Murphy Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 10:17:28 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20140919034628.23926.33929.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: sidr wg list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/DcY7x-v-XzIEM5u9WAyGilGlCns Cc: Sandra Murphy Subject: [sidr] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 14:17:40 -0000 There's been no comment in the wg on this draft, but the changes came = from material in another draft that did have some working group = attention. The authors and chairs are satisfied that this draft is ready for a = wglc. Coming soon to a mailbox near you. --Sandy, speaking as one of wg co-chairs Begin forwarded message: > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Subject: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt > Date: September 18, 2014 11:46:28 PM EDT > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: sidr@ietf.org >=20 >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts = directories. > This draft is a work item of the Secure Inter-Domain Routing Working = Group of the IETF. >=20 > Title : Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Trust Anchor = Locator > Authors : Geoff Huston > Samuel Weiler > George Michaelson > Stephen Kent > Filename : draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt > Pages : 9 > Date : 2014-09-18 >=20 > Abstract: > This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource > Certificate Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). >=20 >=20 > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis/ >=20 > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 >=20 > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 >=20 >=20 > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of = submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Fri Sep 26 07:18:10 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133E11A8856 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:18:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.235 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bkC1MmCFz4mN for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from walnut.tislabs.com (walnut.tislabs.com [192.94.214.200]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FD391A88F8 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:17:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nova.tislabs.com (unknown [10.66.1.77]) by walnut.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9522928B003D; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 10:17:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nova.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5E91F8036; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 10:17:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Sandra Murphy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 10:17:45 -0400 Message-Id: <6244188E-416B-4A49-B28F-663B37D1DC7F@parsons.com> To: sidr wg list Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/eaxA261b-BCWxPY4_vmXe95cdZM Cc: Sandra Murphy Subject: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 14:18:08 -0000 The authors of Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator, = draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt believe the draft is ready for a = WGLC. This starts a two week working group last call, to end on 10 Oct 2014. The draft is available at = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01. Please do comment on the list, indicating whether you believe this draft = is ready for publication. Note that silence is sufficient. There must = be support from the wg indicating consensus for publication. --Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs.= From nobody Fri Sep 26 08:05:12 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10BD61A8965 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vvGNcSkZ7t7d for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-x230.google.com (mail-qg0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CB781A8963 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id z107so8889879qgd.7 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=v4iat44aDtqgIBUVVD9bXxo/8cf8iMX6Aa+NdmBatSY=; b=AVBex0LQaNyGpWmofxKXLlxrPESRZWDCwASCETJVuQInKqJX61prAQh+kAxR9gexIT n2L3mn3Sgf2HDf9xdRg26iAGAtNNaoL/uKpvyI+mkyhOysHTPXFHHfyFGKAsaeNKR0VE PrABWa1Sbh4avR1g300+12a9wulva9yBX41eR8z9gnQmVPdSCPaT7NHG64D4LFDKHooM bYl6PyytF6YvLklBw0i8/0ec18ToVS7mvyADxgStAsdnnyL10uN9YpCppYqNLqvJsUFM v/rDXKNrHvdu3ZlVT3LxPOudAxkqCb4bcCrr/ZmopMPyQpaVTSbU2AbvnH2IwBRHzq3p +Dlg== X-Received: by 10.224.80.131 with SMTP id t3mr29168506qak.35.1411743908703; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from albion.local ([2001:13c7:7001:7000:b0b1:39c4:946:22aa]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e4sm4816991qgf.32.2014.09.26.08.05.06 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <542580A0.3000808@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:05:04 -0300 From: "Carlos M. Martinez" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sandra Murphy , sidr wg list References: <20140919034628.23926.33929.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/gYomrIYumkdbKmXajNaJ9JaWMBk Subject: Re: [sidr] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: carlos@lacnic.net List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:05:11 -0000 I did send a couple of comments. Did anyone see them ? In any case, they were minor, so no objection to WGLC on my part. On 26/09/2014 11:17, Sandra Murphy wrote: > > There's been no comment in the wg on this draft, but the changes came from material in another draft that did have some working group attention. > > The authors and chairs are satisfied that this draft is ready for a wglc. Coming soon to a mailbox near you. > > --Sandy, speaking as one of wg co-chairs > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org >> Subject: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt >> Date: September 18, 2014 11:46:28 PM EDT >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> Cc: sidr@ietf.org >> >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Secure Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. >> >> Title : Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator >> Authors : Geoff Huston >> Samuel Weiler >> George Michaelson >> Stephen Kent >> Filename : draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt >> Pages : 9 >> Date : 2014-09-18 >> >> Abstract: >> This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource >> Certificate Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). >> >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis/ >> >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 >> >> >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sidr mailing list >> sidr@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > From nobody Fri Sep 26 08:05:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 345221A8954 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Dd1xXVitWORA for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-x22a.google.com (mail-qg0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 301FF1A8963 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id z60so7997148qgd.29 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=LJlbksP6ERhUXBEAriHdahd3lXG5VsIXj6CZ1uCHot4=; b=SM0IOvZmD4qWm+VVO+wyykx4Q0eXwABw1J6KfAPN4ZveTJlcjPxqcjPbSLCN0nalnj 5N9hFGfP2158P1eJNYiinov2+UUNPvo1yuFPjAlQL0nKvIBHPnjvb1ECGqSTeNLsBJb1 rbSAFN7Q/wsvNc2e+sHu2ZNV8sYcUu8dcSw0C4uZyosDbSvHTt3etiGyII/YnA3Ta0oI piiDij+M/yJ0HpWls2tL3TxjGeQRJxucjOJWYFP93YsKu81NLJSIGZFhDG+zlqQhBmRe pbHLTXm8UmBjWR5jkU0GNuKZhUUyJHwK5jWCTciUG1cD02c7/LzmJw3L8C3YUL8+ZD0S iQNA== X-Received: by 10.229.140.70 with SMTP id h6mr28664266qcu.3.1411743942835; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from albion.local ([2001:13c7:7001:7000:b0b1:39c4:946:22aa]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y15sm1092680qgd.38.2014.09.26.08.05.40 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:05:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <542580C3.4080208@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:05:39 -0300 From: "Carlos M. Martinez" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sandra Murphy , sidr wg list References: <6244188E-416B-4A49-B28F-663B37D1DC7F@parsons.com> In-Reply-To: <6244188E-416B-4A49-B28F-663B37D1DC7F@parsons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/lf0WmBKsiQtstOrTbdwsHg_B32Q Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: carlos@lacnic.net List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:05:48 -0000 I support publication of this document. On 26/09/2014 11:17, Sandra Murphy wrote: > The authors of Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator, draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt believe the draft is ready for a WGLC. > > This starts a two week working group last call, to end on 10 Oct 2014. > > The draft is available at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01. > > Please do comment on the list, indicating whether you believe this draft is ready for publication. Note that silence is sufficient. There must be support from the wg indicating consensus for publication. > > --Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs. > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > From nobody Fri Sep 26 08:36:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D601A89AD for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:36:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t1mJ3vWcskr1 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x229.google.com (mail-qc0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07CA81A89B0 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:36:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id r5so5839733qcx.14 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:36:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+krI2OKK6/RvXWe9U3KhCX6cPV0n1YJUEHVOYWd7NpA=; b=hitwbVjOWMK3508msOE9Swmn/OhCi6XXd5K12OqYcBfi0A1VNHhPRXz6A2mMFVdQxw 1nRTE/C+YIh+1xFHr9BzLQah2ZdmfEoHgwfmWckh0TE+D6U+AMsQR9eBEjJHiNuv9iqy 8y2sa/fwH7PRn4RdOxxyiKXpfPIquucv3640zZn7HDV03CNpA+/ehDSGs96zgVfUIii6 Pk8F17ZvSNAwEhxG17budXhXXWUSquWkC6E5LJRJbjjDjCpiUMXk4DoVQfotRsZySe7S +5A7wvpNWoBPxU1BJ2lPFBTMSMKQR8EsvMMRMeSx2pMMZnPQ/+PU13hUAUHxN17IWAe5 BHUA== X-Received: by 10.140.51.104 with SMTP id t95mr35178295qga.31.1411745781993; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from albion.local ([2001:13c7:7001:7000:b0b1:39c4:946:22aa]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f7sm4894787qas.32.2014.09.26.08.36.20 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <542587F1.6090303@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:36:17 -0300 From: "Carlos M. Martinez" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "sidr@ietf.org" References: <54231B57.3070508@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <54231B57.3070508@gmail.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <54231B57.3070508@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/Rz-7f3I0rBgFLAirL7-DjkJ-4vo Subject: [sidr] Fwd: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: carlos@lacnic.net List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:36:28 -0000 // Re-sending as requested by Sandy -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:28:23 -0300 From: Carlos M. Martinez Reply-To: carlos@lacnic.net To: internet-drafts@ietf.org, i-d-announce@ietf.org CC: sidr@ietf.org A couple of comments here: - I have the feeling that it'd be good to begin referring to locators as just 'URIs' instead of insisting on them being 'rsync URIs'. If the group ever decides to address the subject of repository transport, and since we are revisiting 6490, we might save little work down the road. - A two or more URI example would be a good addition. regards Carlos On 19/09/2014 00:46, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Secure Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator > Authors : Geoff Huston > Samuel Weiler > George Michaelson > Stephen Kent > Filename : draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt > Pages : 9 > Date : 2014-09-18 > > Abstract: > This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource > Certificate Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis/ > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > From nobody Mon Sep 29 07:23:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62EC61A6FD0 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 07:23:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yTNBgZkrGXps for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 07:23:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0770.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::770]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3B441A8727 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 07:23:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BN1PR09MB0274.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (25.160.80.23) by BN1PR09MB0276.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (25.160.80.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1024.12; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:22:59 +0000 Received: from BN1PR09MB0274.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([25.160.80.23]) by BN1PR09MB0274.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([25.160.80.23]) with mapi id 15.00.1024.012; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:22:59 +0000 From: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi" To: Christopher Morrow , Chris Morrow Thread-Topic: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration Thread-Index: AQHPws7WHBkdMaxqhkmi/vQSRaQJx5v9pjwAgAmU/gCAERGRAA== Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:22:59 +0000 Message-ID: <1dace22e606b4dc7ab1cdf1effa6fd5b@BN1PR09MB0274.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> References: <53FF40A8.5020100@ops-netman.net> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [129.6.140.100] x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;UriScan:; x-forefront-prvs: 034902F5BC x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(189002)(199003)(99286002)(95666004)(90102001)(108616004)(64706001)(20776003)(46102003)(74502003)(81542003)(80022003)(74662003)(77982003)(81342003)(79102003)(50986999)(107046002)(106356001)(101416001)(85306004)(106116001)(105586002)(77096002)(230783001)(76176999)(54356999)(86362001)(21056001)(85852003)(83072002)(97736003)(87936001)(2656002)(74316001)(99396003)(76576001)(33646002)(120916001)(10300001)(76482002)(4396001)(92566001)(66066001)(83322001)(31966008)(24736002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN1PR09MB0276; H:BN1PR09MB0274.namprd09.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:3; A:1; LANG:en; Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/DlTKUvUZqh4xR3S1e3EuJI5DbBI Cc: "sidr-ads@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:23:29 -0000 I support the publication of this document as an RFC. I have read the revised -02 version carefully. The description of the methodology is clear, and no inconsistencies found=20 with reference to the BGPsec protocol draft [draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protoco= l].=20 I thank the authors for incorporating most of my earlier comments/suggestio= ns. Some minor nits/editorial comments follow: 1. Figures 3 and 4 from the companion I-D draft-ietf-idr-as-migration are r= eferenced=20 several times in this document. It would be easier for the readers if those= two figures=20 are reproduced in this document when they are first referenced.=20 Readers can then avoid having to go back and forth between the two document= s. 2. The meaning of this sentence on p.4 is lost on me.=20 "Since they are using methods to migrate that do not require coordination with customers, they do not have a great deal of control over the length of the transition period as they might with something completely under their administrative control (e.g. a key roll)." For me, "do not require coordination with customers" and=20 "completely under their administrative control" are on the same=20 side of the equation. May be this paraphrasing will help: "Since they are using interim methods to migrate that seek to postpone requiring coordination with customers, they do not have a great deal of control over the length of the transition period as they might with something completely under their administrative control (e.g. a key roll)." 3. Sentence on p.5 reads: "Assuming that this mismatch will be allowed by vendor implementations and using it as a means to solve this migration case is likely to be problematic." Please consider changing it to (for grammatical accuracy): "Assuming that this mismatch will be allowed by vendor implementations, using it as a means to solve this migration case is likely to be problematic." Thanks. Sriram =20 =20 From nobody Mon Sep 29 18:18:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 479E61A00B2 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:18:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.686 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.686 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KTz0T1X_fFYa for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95F5E1A00B0 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1XYm5W-0006Ia-2y; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 01:18:46 +0000 Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:18:42 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi" In-Reply-To: <1dace22e606b4dc7ab1cdf1effa6fd5b@BN1PR09MB0274.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> References: <53FF40A8.5020100@ops-netman.net> <1dace22e606b4dc7ab1cdf1effa6fd5b@BN1PR09MB0274.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/K3PAUKXg8Jl23wGjbagMhV1FlWk Cc: Chris Morrow , "sidr-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" , "sidr-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 01:18:54 -0000 > 1. Figures 3 and 4 from the companion I-D draft-ietf-idr-as-migration > are referenced several times in this document. It would be easier > for the readers if those two figures are reproduced in this > document when they are first referenced. uh, having data in two places is a recipe for trouble. this is why we do references. i really don't like copy and paste between docs. but perhaps i am alone in this. rest of your comments fool me into belief :) randy From nobody Tue Sep 30 02:34:07 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D20441A02FF for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 02:34:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.286 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.286 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JbvrONzA1ugJ for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 02:34:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 451CC1A02FE for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 02:34:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7889; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1412069643; x=1413279243; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=nMe1taPcykLcgE8t+CODAp4DqChEBx1jnCbOEwxl/Lk=; b=TyLjeQWhCFwDxHElY1d0HvHmM0N9sIPJk7GXHh+hrBcTnCjvfX69r1jE vFx3EKQyjIG2olMKHHvRauva5nUkFjjQJVA54HKef68xYz3XbgdK2RDNo ML2TaguJ/EbrPj7f+smRHk25LDlHimqdnTmo3JMOyIApNhw1uR6vw1r5o 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiAFAGl4KlStJV2R/2dsb2JhbABggw5TVwTIMoFjAQmHTgKBEBYBe4QDAQEBBAEBAWsLEAIBCBEDAQIoBycLFAkIAgQOBYg+Db8VAReQDREGAYMugR0FkWWEOocJgWKTe4NjbIFIgQIBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,625,1406592000"; d="scan'208,217";a="359432050" Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Sep 2014 09:34:02 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com [173.36.12.84]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s8U9Y2iC007014 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 30 Sep 2014 09:34:02 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.4.84]) by xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com ([173.36.12.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:34:01 -0500 From: "Roque Gagliano (rogaglia)" To: Sandra Murphy Thread-Topic: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt Thread-Index: AQHP3JGrwmJvrqCzzEiZ4Iw1/b/iog== Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 09:34:01 +0000 Message-ID: <67850A1E-E560-490C-85BF-BBB79223252B@cisco.com> References: <6244188E-416B-4A49-B28F-663B37D1DC7F@parsons.com> <542580C3.4080208@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <542580C3.4080208@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.147.34.92] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_67850A1EE560490C85BFBBB79223252Bciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/ORN_AybEDjym6VnlTw1Vzxb1oe0 Cc: Carlos Martinez , sidr wg list Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 09:34:05 -0000 --_000_67850A1EE560490C85BFBBB79223252Bciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I read the document and support its publication. Roque From: Carlos M. Martinez Date: Fri Sep 26 2014 17:07:07 To: Sandra Murphy Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt I support publication of this document. On 26/09/2014 11:17, Sandra Murphy wrote: The authors of Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator, draft-= ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt believe the draft is ready for a WGLC. This starts a two week working group last call, to end on 10 Oct 2014. The draft is available at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc649= 0-bis-01. Please do comment on the list, indicating whether you believe this draft is= ready for publication. Note that silence is sufficient. There must be su= pport from the wg indicating consensus for publication. --Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr --_000_67850A1EE560490C85BFBBB79223252Bciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <16526E8FF71F564288209A95C20599E2@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I read the document and support its publication.

Roque

From: Carlos M. Martinez
Date: Fri Sep 26 2014 17:07:07
To: Sandra Murphy
Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt
I support publication of this document.

On 26/09/2014 11:17, Sandra Murphy wrote:
The authors of Resource Certificate PKI (RPKI) Tr= ust Anchor Locator, draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.txt believe the draft is= ready for a WGLC.

This starts a two week working group last call, to end on 10 Oct 2014.

The draft is available at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-01.

Please do comment on the list, indicating whether you believe this draft is= ready for publication.  Note that silence is sufficient.  There = must be support from the wg indicating consensus for publication.

--Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs.
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr


_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

--_000_67850A1EE560490C85BFBBB79223252Bciscocom_-- From nobody Tue Sep 30 10:27:59 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C081A1F73 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:27:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.251 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fNWJzKpwuM2o for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:27:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cdpipgw01.twcable.com (cdpipgw01.twcable.com [165.237.59.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B906F1A1BF5 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:27:55 -0700 (PDT) X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.11 X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,628,1406606400"; d="scan'208";a="532520431" Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB02.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.11]) by cdpipgw01.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 30 Sep 2014 13:24:10 -0400 Received: from PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.79]) by PRVPEXHUB02.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.11]) with mapi; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:27:54 -0400 From: "George, Wes" To: Randy Bush , "Sriram, Kotikalapudi" Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:28:33 -0400 Thread-Topic: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration Thread-Index: Ac/c094ynBuYdauVSIGs9THTuRlvKA== Message-ID: References: <53FF40A8.5020100@ops-netman.net> <1dace22e606b4dc7ab1cdf1effa6fd5b@BN1PR09MB0274.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.4.140807 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/bOe3Bol1RJzKIVSon9CYxTeMKBQ Cc: Chris Morrow , "sidr-ads@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:27:57 -0000 T24gOS8yOS8xNCwgOToxOCBQTSwgIlJhbmR5IEJ1c2giIDxyYW5keUBwc2cuY29tPiB3cm90ZToN Cg0KDQo+PiAxLiBGaWd1cmVzIDMgYW5kIDQgZnJvbSB0aGUgY29tcGFuaW9uIEktRCBkcmFmdC1p ZXRmLWlkci1hcy1taWdyYXRpb24NCj4+ICAgIGFyZSByZWZlcmVuY2VkIHNldmVyYWwgdGltZXMg aW4gdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4gSXQgd291bGQgYmUgZWFzaWVyDQo+PiAgICBmb3IgdGhlIHJlYWRl cnMgaWYgdGhvc2UgdHdvIGZpZ3VyZXMgYXJlIHJlcHJvZHVjZWQgaW4gdGhpcw0KPj4gICAgZG9j dW1lbnQgd2hlbiB0aGV5IGFyZSBmaXJzdCByZWZlcmVuY2VkLg0KPg0KPnVoLCBoYXZpbmcgZGF0 YSBpbiB0d28gcGxhY2VzIGlzIGEgcmVjaXBlIGZvciB0cm91YmxlLiAgdGhpcyBpcyB3aHkgd2UN Cj5kbyByZWZlcmVuY2VzLiAgaSByZWFsbHkgZG9uJ3QgbGlrZSBjb3B5IGFuZCBwYXN0ZSBiZXR3 ZWVuIGRvY3MuICBidXQNCj5wZXJoYXBzIGkgYW0gYWxvbmUgaW4gdGhpcy4NCg0KV0ddIEkgYWdy ZWUsIG15IHByZWZlcmVuY2UgaXMgdG8gbGVhdmUgdGhlIGRpYWdyYW1zIGluIHRoZSByZWZlcmVu Y2VkDQpkb2N1bWVudCwgYW5kIGFzc3VtZSB0aGF0IHRob3NlIHJldmlld2luZyBjYW4gbWFuYWdl IHRvIGhhdmUgdHdvIHBhcmFsbGVsDQp3aW5kb3dzIG9wZW4gKG9uZSBvZiB0aGUgZmV3IHBsYWNl cyB3aGVyZSBJRVRGJ3Mgc2VsZi1pbXBvc2VkIHRleHQtd2lkdGgNCnJlc3RyaWN0aW9ucyBjb21l IGluIGhhbmR5KSBvciBicmllZmx5IGNvbW1pdCB0aGUgImhpZ2gtcXVhbGl0eSIgQVNDSUkNCmRp YWdyYW1zIHRvIG1lbW9yeS4NCg0KU3JpcmFtLCBJJ2xsIGluY29ycG9yYXRlIHRoZSByZXN0IG9m IHlvdXIgZmVlZGJhY2sgaW50byBteSBuZXh0IHZlcnNpb24sDQp3aGljaCB3aWxsIGxpa2VseSBi ZSBwb3N0ZWQgZWl0aGVyIGF0IElFVEYgTEMgb3IgZHVlIHRvIGRpcmVjdG9yYXRlIHJldmlldy4N Cg0KVGhhbmtzIGZvciBnaXZpbmcgaXQgYW5vdGhlciBsb29rDQoNCldlcw0KDQoNClRoaXMgRS1t YWlsIGFuZCBhbnkgb2YgaXRzIGF0dGFjaG1lbnRzIG1heSBjb250YWluIFRpbWUgV2FybmVyIENh YmxlIHByb3ByaWV0YXJ5IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCB3aGljaCBpcyBwcml2aWxlZ2VkLCBjb25maWRl bnRpYWwsIG9yIHN1YmplY3QgdG8gY29weXJpZ2h0IGJlbG9uZ2luZyB0byBUaW1lIFdhcm5lciBD YWJsZS4gVGhpcyBFLW1haWwgaXMgaW50ZW5kZWQgc29sZWx5IGZvciB0aGUgdXNlIG9mIHRoZSBp bmRpdmlkdWFsIG9yIGVudGl0eSB0byB3aGljaCBpdCBpcyBhZGRyZXNzZWQuIElmIHlvdSBhcmUg bm90IHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgb2YgdGhpcyBFLW1haWwsIHlvdSBhcmUgaGVyZWJ5 IG5vdGlmaWVkIHRoYXQgYW55IGRpc3NlbWluYXRpb24sIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiwgY29weWluZywg b3IgYWN0aW9uIHRha2VuIGluIHJlbGF0aW9uIHRvIHRoZSBjb250ZW50cyBvZiBhbmQgYXR0YWNo bWVudHMgdG8gdGhpcyBFLW1haWwgaXMgc3RyaWN0bHkgcHJvaGliaXRlZCBhbmQgbWF5IGJlIHVu bGF3ZnVsLiBJZiB5b3UgaGF2ZSByZWNlaXZlZCB0aGlzIEUtbWFpbCBpbiBlcnJvciwgcGxlYXNl IG5vdGlmeSB0aGUgc2VuZGVyIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IGFuZCBwZXJtYW5lbnRseSBkZWxldGUgdGhl IG9yaWdpbmFsIGFuZCBhbnkgY29weSBvZiB0aGlzIEUtbWFpbCBhbmQgYW55IHByaW50b3V0Lg0K