From nobody Mon Oct 3 04:55:41 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietf.org Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E46C12B174; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 04:55:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.34.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <147549573538.29788.558040062904935004.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 04:55:35 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: sidr@ietf.org Subject: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-07.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 11:55:36 -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 of the IETF. Title : RPKI Validation Reconsidered Authors : Geoff Huston George Michaelson Carlos M. Martinez Tim Bruijnzeels Andrew Lee Newton Daniel Shaw Filename : draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-07.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2016-10-03 Abstract: This document proposes an update to the certificate validation procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while retaining essential security features. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-07 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-07 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 Mon Oct 3 05:02:34 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5024912B016 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 05:02:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 RFSipmVhqsaf for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 05:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mahimahi.ripe.net (mahimahi.ripe.net [IPv6:2001:67c:2e8:11::c100:1372]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1A6F12B008 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 05:02:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nene.ripe.net ([193.0.23.10]) by mahimahi.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1br1wu-0008AG-CP for sidr@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 14:02:26 +0200 Received: from sslvpn.ripe.net ([193.0.20.230] helo=vpn-114.ripe.net) by nene.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1br1wu-0001ym-19; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 14:02:24 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Tim Bruijnzeels In-Reply-To: <147549573538.29788.558040062904935004.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 14:02:23 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <94FCC144-5FE1-4848-A79D-72EFE433A0C7@ripe.net> References: <147549573538.29788.558040062904935004.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: sidr X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-ACL-Warn: Delaying message X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ------------ X-RIPE-Spam-Report: Spam Total Points: -12.0 points pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ -7.5 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -2.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-RIPE-Signature: 784d7acfe6559f2a0b602ec6519a0719dbd181090b4d6756b6218e424b52197d Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-07.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 12:02:32 -0000 Dear working group, Following working group feedback from the session in Berlin, and on = list, this new version now includes new OIDs to make the choice of = validation algorithm explicit. The OIDs were not requested from IANA = yet, because I first want to make sure that the text and structure as = written is correct. This version also contains a suggested deployment = time line, essentially requiring RP software to support this within a = reasonable timeframe, and allowing CAs to opt-in to this algorithm. We hope that this addresses the remaining concerns that were raised. Kind regards Tim Bruijnzeels > On 03 Oct 2016, at 13:55, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=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 of the = IETF. >=20 > Title : RPKI Validation Reconsidered > Authors : Geoff Huston > George Michaelson > Carlos M. Martinez > Tim Bruijnzeels > Andrew Lee Newton > Daniel Shaw > Filename : = draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-07.txt > Pages : 21 > Date : 2016-10-03 >=20 > Abstract: > This document proposes an update to the certificate validation > procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational > fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while > retaining essential security features. >=20 >=20 > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconside= red/ >=20 > There's also a htmlized version available at: > = https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-0= 7 >=20 > A diff from the previous version is available at: > = https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-recons= idered-07 >=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 Mon Oct 10 21:43:05 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6261294E0 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:43:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 2qn1SWZZNmRf for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net (relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net [IPv6:2606:700:e:550:5c82:28ff:fe25:4960]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F1E212944E for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.ops-netman.net (mailserver.ops-netman.net [199.168.90.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2ABD3FEA4 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 04:43:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from morrowc-glaptop4.roam.corp.google.com.ops-netman.net (static-96-241-182-39.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.241.182.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9531811DB856B for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 04:43:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 00:43:01 -0400 Message-ID: From: Chris Morrow To: sidr@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Organization: Operations Network Management, Ltd. MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: [sidr] Seoul/IETF97 Meeting Agenda Request X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 04:43:04 -0000 howdy SIDR folk, So far there's 1 requested slot, we have possibly 2.5 hrs to discuss the goings-on of SIDR. Please send your agenda time requests forth-with! Please also make sure that your slides are available to the chairs by Monday morning (11/14/2016)... slides received after will be less likely to be available for use during the meeting. -chris co-chairing-this-event From nobody Tue Oct 11 07:08:46 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC66C129551; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:08:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 YNqYciqHT8ef; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:08:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net (relay.ops-netman.net [192.110.255.59]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C33C5129553; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:08:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.ops-netman.net (mailserver.ops-netman.net [199.168.90.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27A0740878; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from morrowc-glaptop4.roam.corp.google.com.ops-netman.net (unknown [104.132.12.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 182E211E689D4; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:08:42 -0400 Message-ID: From: Chris Morrow To: sidr@ietf.org, sidr-chairs@ietf.org, sidr-ads@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Organization: Operations Network Management, Ltd. MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:08:45 -0000 Howdy WG folks! The authors of: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. The abstract for this draft is: "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while retaining essential security features." Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts please, this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. thanks for reading/replying/thinking! -chris co-chair-persona From nobody Tue Oct 11 07:15:17 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B243E129508; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:15:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 oLLWvoHUsCAY; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net (relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net [IPv6:2606:700:e:550:5c82:28ff:fe25:4960]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25DBD1294B1; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.ops-netman.net (mailserver.ops-netman.net [199.168.90.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76C9B40878; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:15:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from morrowc-glaptop4.roam.corp.google.com.ops-netman.net (unknown [104.132.12.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6545511E69BA6; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:15:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:15:13 -0400 Message-ID: From: Chris Morrow To: sidr@ietf.org,sidr-chairs@ietf.org,sidr-ads@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Organization: Operations Network Management, Ltd. MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol - 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:15:16 -0000 Howdy WG Folks! Let's chat (email) about the subject document: draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol The authors believe they have dealt with all open items and are interested in moving this document forward to IESG for publication. Let's have a read/write/arithmetic time with the draft and send comments/questions/suggestions/etc to the list for the authors to handle or, possibly just: "yea! move this document along!" if you believe it's ready for the next step in it's lifecycle. The WGLC should end 10/25/2016 - October 25th 2016. The abstract for this document is: "In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), certificate authorities publish certificates, including end entity certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists (CRL), and RPKI signed objects to repositories. Relying Parties (RP) retrieve the published information from those repositories. This document specifies a delta protocol which provides relying parties with a mechanism to query a repository for incremental updates, thus enabling the RP to keep its state in sync with the repository." thanks! -chris co-chair-persona From nobody Thu Oct 13 04:47:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F5B31294A3; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:47:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 8-vui8C07mAa; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:47:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from molamola.ripe.net (molamola.ripe.net [IPv6:2001:67c:2e8:11::c100:1371]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A0FD128874; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:47:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nene.ripe.net ([193.0.23.10]) by molamola.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bueTz-0004PE-Ec; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:47:33 +0200 Received: from sslvpn.ripe.net ([193.0.20.230] helo=vpn-183.ripe.net) by nene.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bueTz-000406-7m; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:47:31 +0200 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: Tim Bruijnzeels In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:47:30 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <57FF1011-597F-4B80-98C4-1CB98C81FF22@ripe.net> References: <71D7D3ED-BC1C-408C-BB56-832C6E27E37A@zdns.cn> To: Christopher Morrow X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-ACL-Warn: Delaying message X-RIPE-Spam-Level: --------- X-RIPE-Spam-Report: Spam Total Points: -9.8 points pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ -7.5 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-RIPE-Signature: 784d7acfe6559f2a0b602ec6519a0719a5fd3a9fd0c37a2363b46a54c152cad3 Archived-At: Cc: "Benoit Claise \(bclaise\)" , "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , sidr wg list , rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [sidr] Proposal for next steps - chartering sidrops? X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:47:39 -0000 Hi all, My apologies for being two months late with this reply, but fwiw I would = like to support what Carlos and others raised in this thread about = sidr-ops being inclusive to CA operators. Tim > On 23 Aug 2016, at 16:48, Christopher Morrow = wrote: >=20 > routing-ads -> rtg-ads. >=20 > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Christopher Morrow = wrote: > (fixed sidr-chairs, don't know routing-ads alias, apparently) >=20 > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Christopher Morrow = wrote: > The changes from Carlos seem ok to me, and declan's points about = ca/rir also seem on point. > thanks! (for fixing the clearly network centric text!) >=20 > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 5:03 PM, joel jaeggli = wrote: > On 8/17/16 7:43 PM, Declan Ma wrote: > > Joel, > > > > When we are talking about SIDROPS, we are referring to that BGP = speakers are resorting to RPKI relying party to get verified INR = authorization information, which is created by CA and maintained by = repository managers. > > > > IMHO, network operators are not the only RPKI role that the = community is going to solicit input from. CA operators, repository = operators, RP service providers all bear significance as with SIDR = Operations, in identifying issues and sharing experiences. > Yeah there are a bunch of actors who are operators of elements other > than networks. >=20 > RIRs and CAs spring immediately to mind. > > Although network operators could also be CA operators, repository = operators, RP service providers, yet RIRs, CA and repository backend = service providers, and third party RP don=E2=80=99t fall into the = category of =E2=80=98network operators=E2=80=99. > > > > I would suggest the =E2=80=9CThe goals of the sidr-ops working = group=E2=80=9D be adjusted slightly, with CA operators, repository = operators, RP service providers involved. > yeah I think the tent should be inclusive. > > > > Di > > > >> =E5=9C=A8 2016=E5=B9=B48=E6=9C=8818=E6=97=A5=EF=BC=8C00:46=EF=BC=8Cjo= el jaeggli =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > >> > >> Folks, > >> > >> Some discussion prior to the recent IETF led us to ask the ask the > >> question about what to do now that SIDR is close to having achieved = it's > >> major milestones. One possible approach we have been looking at is = to > >> Charter a new activity associated with the deployment and operation = of > >> SIDR systems within networks. Here is an initial stab at a sidrops > >> charter with the milestones drawn from existing SIDR discussion. > >> > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-sidrops/ > >> > >> > >> The global deployment of RPKI, Origin Validation of BGP = announcements > >> and BGPSEC, collectively called SIDR, is underway, creating an = Internet > >> Routing System consisting of SIDR-aware and non-SIDR-aware = networks. > >> This deployment must be properly handled to avoid the division of > >> the Internet into separate networks, ensuring as secure a routing > >> system as possible, through encouraged deployment of the SIDR = technologies. > >> > >> The SIDR Operations Working Group (sidr-ops) develops guidelines = for > >> the operation of SIDR-aware networks, and provides operational = guidance > >> on how to deploy and operate SIDR technologies in new and existing = networks. > >> > >> The main focuaess of the SIDR Operations Working Group are to: > >> o discuss deployment and operational issues related to SIDR = technologies > >> in networks which are part of the global routing system. > >> o gather and discuss deployment experiences with the SIDR = technologies in > >> networks which are part of the global routing system. > >> > >> The goals of the sidr-ops working group are: > >> > >> 1. Solicit input from network operators to identify > >> operational issues with a SIDR-aware Internet, and determine = solutions > >> or workarounds to those issues. > >> > >> 2. Solicit input from network operators to identify > >> operational interaction issues with the non-SIDR-aware Internet, > >> and determine solutions or workarounds to those issues. > >> > >> 3. Operational solutions for identified issues should be = developed > >> in sidr-ops and documented in informational or BCP documents. > >> > >> These documents should document SIDR operational experience, = including > >> interactions with non-SIDR-aware networks, the interfaces between = SIDR-aware > >> and non-SIDR-aware networks, and the continued = operational/security impacts > >> from non-SIDR-aware networks. > >> > >> SIDR operational and deployment issues with Interdomain Routing = Protocols > >> are the primary responsibility of the IDR working gruop. However, = the > >> sidr-ops Working Group may provide input to that group, as needed, = and > >> cooperate with that group in reviewing solutions to SIDR = operational and > >> deployment problems. > >> > >> Future work items within this scope will be adopted by the Working > >> Group only if there is a substantial expression of interest from > >> the community and if the work clearly does not fit elsewhere in = the > >> IETF. > >> > >> There must be a continuous expression of interest for the Working > >> Group to work on a particular work item. If there is no longer > >> sufficient interest in the Working Group in a work item, the item > >> may be removed from the list of Working Group items. > >> > >> > >> Feedback on this proposal and possible milestones above and beyond = those > >> currently present is appreciated before we circulate this for wider = review. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> sidr mailing list > >> sidr@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > > >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Sun Oct 16 20:46:16 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1693129435; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:46:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.331 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.331 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 ZGgrF80bYedQ; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:46:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A886129406; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mbp-2.local ([199.227.111.28]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u9H3k7XB018229 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 17 Oct 2016 03:46:08 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) X-Authentication-Warning: nagasaki.bogus.com: Host [199.227.111.28] claimed to be mbp-2.local To: sidr wg list , sidrops@ietf.org From: joel jaeggli Message-ID: <2efa595c-c64f-c926-f43a-3c1bf1d8103c@bogus.com> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:46:07 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/50.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Io4B6JbVDFJt3xNrP11A97XppN7E3Pu1e" Archived-At: Cc: Chris Morrow Subject: [sidr] Updated status information for sidrops formation X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 03:46:15 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Io4B6JbVDFJt3xNrP11A97XppN7E3Pu1e Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="g8bFk9idVeCiVcrMCK5EM8UctEA3HwAC2"; protected-headers="v1" From: joel jaeggli To: sidr wg list , sidrops@ietf.org Cc: Chris Morrow Message-ID: <2efa595c-c64f-c926-f43a-3c1bf1d8103c@bogus.com> Subject: Updated status information for sidrops formation --g8bFk9idVeCiVcrMCK5EM8UctEA3HwAC2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en-US Folks, Some notes on the status of the sidrops proposal. The proposed charter passed internal reivew in the IESG. it is awaiting another editorial pass prior to going for external review. That process is expected to complete prior to IETF 97. https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/sidrops/charter/ A new mailing list has been created to support this activity. it is available at: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops Chris Morrow has graciously indicated a willingness to take on chairing, so we have one chair in place. More news on that soon. The expectation is that the working group if formed will meet first at IETF 98. The proposed charter includes work items which are already underway. Thanks, feedback is appreciated. joel --g8bFk9idVeCiVcrMCK5EM8UctEA3HwAC2-- --Io4B6JbVDFJt3xNrP11A97XppN7E3Pu1e Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iEYEARECAAYFAlgESYAACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrJoBgCfex1pyvRRU1STDn4llsh9cE9Z y0cAn2Gy6Qvcgj/WdktV0MPglAWbHwrH =i+jE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Io4B6JbVDFJt3xNrP11A97XppN7E3Pu1e-- From nobody Thu Oct 20 07:18:09 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBA7A12962E for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 EK9RnMQfz5OG for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FB3B12949C for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id n189so96874245qke.0 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:06 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=RGcYmO9Gc1boc++ablGVcZF67WulV2azDfZlm4RWC3w=; b=JuVZh8vK9jLIr6fd794uIHcUp3QwYhjhSAYZC/fTXietRQx30d1E0CcD3gLpuYQviq 9k9JpOfykvrcfXQHR1Vq0pfMWkUkU5+z3zrGXmCsyKQIOiRlINhIWd9YKHcQbAnXu0Fz Wn1VtwdKYb/CHLBzToB1FMtKl34gC/WR99ZRC79BQL9cZSeE//n/HP8Q483Qd3BiALpT 9rrYe0Zv3Fc4XVutM/aqRujo4ZiBA8dHsFO+KMhgOo4kKLZf4Kdq2tRX90CBmToleSAA EFhHt0QT+v7tueQbJyfsawSA/LDfsxby9vaVYHOdqGfF/3OX1n1v12FiIJCA7B/eHXm1 F18g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RGcYmO9Gc1boc++ablGVcZF67WulV2azDfZlm4RWC3w=; b=ckk6fgY6LgSy375zN1KSKXr7pwZN3Fl7MIwDemHWW6aSp2lsE8IydOP2syQiQl1ynf iCw3byEmrl+fdaCCxMRAtEO7Ll8NyTL7mlvkjlDsWu3EO5lsJue9koBiIVo8eV+ppbXo H3YgCxdlFJ9wDde3w6S/5lcRqxvlDoty/bLagzUXvJPCXZelckxy+j7gkSqAC4YYjoPa /q9Ch+nIvbGy3X/0TwCJwRHcJ4j9L30Ultz0zIBWa6gDg3C1ONb3/+A4xjpuzkKG5DWH HddxQBKcTkco9e1EuPQjVBM4R4fgZYSBYiPDhdbNd1Rtmye6cMtBZXHYp7eUUrZEtLiI RQ1w== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdaHLtdJ9liNsqVclOpmTlUHWEeiODracK1LAQcXHoz44BZDSrDasaztJeIWeH33/HjFcH/Oo5tr3kZqQ== X-Received: by 10.233.223.132 with SMTP id t126mr1015201qkf.107.1476973085120; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Morrow Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 10:18:04 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ETuOgwnuNCLirweLiLMoOwkPIJ8 Message-ID: To: Chris Morrow Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c043d2814fae8053f4c98c7 Archived-At: Cc: "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] Seoul/IETF97 Meeting Agenda Request X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 14:18:08 -0000 --94eb2c043d2814fae8053f4c98c7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Howdy! So far, with 20 days to go.. there are 2 folk asking for time... (or possibly I didn't document requests which is totally possible!) If your name isn't Declan Ma or Joel Jaeggli and you had plans to present something in Seoul, please contact the sidr-chairs@ietf.org for scheduling! -chris On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Chris Morrow wrote: > > howdy SIDR folk, > > So far there's 1 requested slot, we have possibly 2.5 hrs to discuss > the goings-on of SIDR. > > Please send your agenda time requests forth-with! > > Please also make sure that your slides are available to the chairs by > Monday morning (11/14/2016)... slides received after will be less > likely to be available for use during the meeting. > > -chris > co-chairing-this-event > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > --94eb2c043d2814fae8053f4c98c7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Howdy!
So far, with 20 days to go.. there are 2 folk a= sking for time...=C2=A0
(or possibly I didn't document reques= ts which is totally possible!)

If your name isn= 9;t Declan Ma or Joel Jaeggli and you had plans to present something in Seo= ul, please contact the sidr-chairs@= ietf.org for scheduling!

-chris

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016= at 12:43 AM, Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net> wro= te:

howdy SIDR folk,

So far there's 1 requested slot, we have possibly 2.5 hrs to discuss the goings-on of SIDR.

Please send your agenda time requests forth-with!

Please also make sure that your slides are available to the chairs by
Monday morning (11/14/2016)... slides received after will be less
likely to be available for use during the meeting.

-chris
co-chairing-this-event

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

--94eb2c043d2814fae8053f4c98c7-- From nobody Thu Oct 20 07:19:02 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C021E129622; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 k1UvjsLkuVa9; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x232.google.com (mail-qt0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0814212949C; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x232.google.com with SMTP id f6so57854903qtd.2; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:59 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=4yRvzmq6aL/F5gx5cmD48XXp22PNin5oEWme6dKy/Sg=; b=iYVD2AK0MXCj1teh3Le9JDEfeop8h61NVk2GeFAEtovaxE7Eq36Ts5dIggMGNOhb2U aKfK5Eeev3sfWGHV1a7YuADCvojB/gEtzYfoquUobsVLOD5D28ty3MqrBNq0LgoSRNTL Bv/dUlVwjR6lEWZo3qjAdjoOO7GK16EG6vL5IW47ljEqKfpYz0MvpqiBCf/ao4CMxQv/ SMfnre7JY9iEFxq+7VVd9KA/xqfS1YgBXxFq68iM535qXC4iXLVeqwrG/LsiBt1VauAT vo0Z93iOZuOnUaJcEW2o2utDMi7N6ZJoH4SgBb5LyPeb5Q/avwaZ7fU6ltJpOldfNKfZ Y4Cg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4yRvzmq6aL/F5gx5cmD48XXp22PNin5oEWme6dKy/Sg=; b=RfCWVLMEuWTU8/811BBgEkwmr8Ufdrb80iRKfWJWRmSWUZHBDhwp3e0qUlOzu5VUm/ JAUEimwFtgz/qFGAHSLpdsiFr3YAx3YpVI6E+U1aLmu47QBeHn3+uswJk2yIV8uKdhSO vCFtXnVqaRzBv9tC+nS8aQ9opGLGkU1Wr6/7HfLwyLyy+8pWsfRkAiHU3vBpypx2VxbB NUvrZjKV0EtWcEpIvMOFjmyNZAtI6p9ReZGk3crFR5EN4caAXcKNJ5rw/WkaUPvyriGZ TyNdg7/42fjXVL80bA0PVijR6jV+xqtWRA2j6XM2ilSRhkrx+f9foVmo2Ege4zaWiEhd rxJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvczT+N3uIpTvpAOhgtSL0osGSpSmE4AOAXuDTzFYNGN+t/l0LdrtKX0Nw5trcScmP9+gsxo69A1M8jomw== X-Received: by 10.237.49.4 with SMTP id 4mr972335qtg.56.1476973139161; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Morrow Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 10:18:58 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: PTUdFsa7YH2uGwn5KjCPfaipmYY Message-ID: To: Chris Morrow Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0cba1e4d7d70053f4c9b10 Archived-At: Cc: sidr-ads@ietf.org, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 14:19:02 -0000 --94eb2c0cba1e4d7d70053f4c9b10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Howdy WG Folks! Have we read this document and do we have opinions on it's intended status/direction/content/the-moon? Thanks! (5 days til timers go off) -chris On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Chris Morrow wrote: > Howdy WG folks! > The authors of: > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered > > believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the > request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if > appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. > > The abstract for this draft is: > "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation > procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational > fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while > retaining essential security features." > > Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts please, > this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. > > thanks for reading/replying/thinking! > -chris > co-chair-persona > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > --94eb2c0cba1e4d7d70053f4c9b10 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Howdy WG Folks!

Have we read this docum= ent and do we have opinions on it's intended status/direction/content/t= he-moon?

Thanks! (5 days til timers go off)
<= div>
-chris

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Chris Morrow <m= orrowc@ops-netman.net> wrote:
Howdy WG folks!
The authors of:
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered

believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the
request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if
appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication.

The abstract for this draft is:
=C2=A0 "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operat= ional
=C2=A0 =C2=A0fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0retaining essential security features."

Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts please= ,
this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016.

thanks for reading/replying/thinking!
-chris
co-chair-persona

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

--94eb2c0cba1e4d7d70053f4c9b10-- From nobody Thu Oct 20 07:20:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D8C5129615; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 7saMqaotkwLR; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x231.google.com (mail-qk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71C19129567; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id n189so96977488qke.0; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:55 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=I7xCbU4R1dcY7GJc2D1vM/HAF/BvQVRENehLR/2oN0Q=; b=oyM7SZpF+/n070jt4yiFA3Xuslmu2wzW1MQ3aJfgIEkUXICg6p5rbIE2AKHUqilEd6 OuRCBmrlADQJ9hZWg73HyXjlaIx+YwWvtmb9tKGSmdFfyQqk++9yBVAXgJKgX5BPHcaw AygAsoPcAL1qqofmeRYZ+jR7PhKbgWYTEgFPzZfC7oABbQhR+ZrdLCXZBa7UBDdfBvX+ oY5n4Yag/VeqW30VnHjQ8iX3i1C7gGvU3wY7dh0opz+vzsPJEjmTmrnAaiKcZpn6bnft x77UbBTfVAylRC3fnOQhR1ypMiv0tXdCWhrXZjrycz/39BpsJTSbsLsCSrSAkrSLdU4J HElw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=I7xCbU4R1dcY7GJc2D1vM/HAF/BvQVRENehLR/2oN0Q=; b=M0jsFLWyLehG8DHBCrJMLcg/ecNsek/EjK0T4TjjsAc80lDFXrpbco3hIHBrApt646 /pCDB6CwCnB9nfvfGID9CfBsOdQsViUD0E8A6JLXitUjXzO01HkTDlZR5h1qbuRaggw5 bs/xlLr/PJMVdAZAfm3zJrXPGrv/dMLWrvg6acvBAT4hQfxQgQk+w9otq2dI54Dh3dXv kGVaZyqs8FYdFs4dZ9ozKS1WNwTWAjAr/H0Ng8YMzKzRxXqKcTDicv7GPJDbyzwk93ns 6j4ynrY67pT4J+a1VU7cEBttiZmZcFZ16j2zouE92caLfFL/ZrIZza6H4M1yMxtDUILg gb7g== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvc3bW4E92wM7q3F9dQjPLNTCyHcAEBtcD3TvUio1nsEYorAHQzFxFCnQirk4neg/tXMafEDljQC2K24oA== X-Received: by 10.55.129.6 with SMTP id c6mr1108643qkd.4.1476973194604; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 07:19:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Morrow Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 10:19:54 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: W8BRyhC4kSQJ_cMapMOOQTvZhMk Message-ID: To: Chris Morrow Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c05cd809b7da9053f4c9e03 Archived-At: Cc: sidr-ads@ietf.org, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol - 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 14:19:59 -0000 --94eb2c05cd809b7da9053f4c9e03 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Howdy! 5 more days until this call expires, please read and comment... or at least say: "Hey! I did read this it is [awesome|horrible|acceptable|dumpsterfire]" thanks! -chris (feel free to cut/paste/edit the quote if it'll save you time) On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Chris Morrow wrote: > > Howdy WG Folks! > Let's chat (email) about the subject document: > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol > > The authors believe they have dealt with all open items and are > interested in moving this document forward to IESG for > publication. Let's have a read/write/arithmetic time with the draft > and send comments/questions/suggestions/etc to the list for the > authors to handle or, possibly just: "yea! move this document along!" > if you believe it's ready for the next step in it's lifecycle. > > The WGLC should end 10/25/2016 - October 25th 2016. > > The abstract for this document is: > "In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), certificate > authorities publish certificates, including end entity certificates, > Certificate Revocation Lists (CRL), and RPKI signed objects to > repositories. Relying Parties (RP) retrieve the published > information from those repositories. This document specifies a delta > protocol which provides relying parties with a mechanism to query a > repository for incremental updates, thus enabling the RP to keep its > state in sync with the repository." > > thanks! > -chris > co-chair-persona > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > --94eb2c05cd809b7da9053f4c9e03 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Howdy!
5 more days until this call expires, please rea= d and comment... or at least say:
=C2=A0 "Hey! I did read this it i= s [awesome|horrible|acceptable|dumpsterfire]"

thanks!
-chris
(feel free to cut/paste/edit the quote = if it'll save you time)

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net> wrote:

Howdy WG Folks!
Let's chat (email) about the subject document:
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol

The authors believe they have dealt with all open items and are
interested in moving this document forward to IESG for
publication. Let's have a read/write/arithmetic time with the draft
and send comments/questions/suggestions/etc to the list for the
authors to handle or, possibly just: "yea! move this document along!&q= uot;
if you believe it's ready for the next step in it's lifecycle.

The WGLC should end 10/25/2016 - October 25th 2016.

The abstract for this document is:
=C2=A0 "In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), certificate<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0authorities publish certificates, including end entity certifi= cates,
=C2=A0 =C2=A0Certificate Revocation Lists (CRL), and RPKI signed objects to=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0repositories.=C2=A0 Relying Parties (RP) retrieve the publishe= d
=C2=A0 =C2=A0information from those repositories.=C2=A0 This document speci= fies a delta
=C2=A0 =C2=A0protocol which provides relying parties with a mechanism to qu= ery a
=C2=A0 =C2=A0repository for incremental updates, thus enabling the RP to ke= ep its
=C2=A0 =C2=A0state in sync with the repository."

thanks!
-chris
co-chair-persona

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

--94eb2c05cd809b7da9053f4c9e03-- From nobody Thu Oct 20 17:13:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A341129455 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 17:13:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.332 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.332 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 D7VfbPD4Lbmw for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 17:13:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B39C127735 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 17:13:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bxNSH-0006hB-Ul; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:13:02 +0000 Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:12:59 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Christopher Morrow In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Cc: sidr wg list Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol - 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:13:04 -0000 i believe i already responded, but just in case. have read, have used, no ill affects detected. ship it. randy From nobody Thu Oct 20 22:04:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 033A81294D3 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 22:04:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=algebras-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com 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 6lXmewrXGrm8 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 22:04:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x231.google.com (mail-it0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC8341294AC for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 22:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x231.google.com with SMTP id 66so136299490itl.1 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 22:04:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=algebras-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=DNcpAwd9WE5Wv6iDmKMrfsl9ZuH27u9ipIBOShC4Q/8=; b=W0JJ49DJr/U0IIA0jqqJY5Mpusy96BH0F+un+HugPgE00oR2qDQQ1JJHDioXVWyEg/ VT9AtOPegOAgQTF6RCqWQlJgtd87I+FXSlzacKNH9orTsXG1JPieNzHttkD5MJ2OJHXV ZbD5ZBHZqLEHOVDU1mut51zFFmlLTtupj3NyXbz9v6AYLYbodXgto/Eg6G4RdbF7kmVl Yf1L9bU8Q+ESexO/+JbWc1U++07buuWl42hkU5K3DpRoms556FoNnl+FUz7p4CDm/JfE ClGKKons0wtqkGXJB1ufP1gjXda9ZC/Blj5JxUZcYxEC+VM70AraPMk9eUilwIiyP0Td a5ig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=DNcpAwd9WE5Wv6iDmKMrfsl9ZuH27u9ipIBOShC4Q/8=; b=ZtfcZ3cU5xnwNjcT0R4+5U0D17B+pQrJ7dUg/gu8HBAiemoW4XUgHEuKYVwnlrI3tU vM/pjDInRg1AHwz+FgNlhpPCiK8VLNtCz3/WI1WB41Z29xS4Dc+2Ayp/f2fynGpHCRVn B1ykPK1cE1T+H3q+cysoMtQqPbpDaAFQkCHygXHmlelMDz3xC5LnYvqYTEI6tbCfXult BAqAS9GFmv/48CGuRcVOZstavZvt3sWTkX3yv98Pjc9V60j02eF4qzCr7AjulBiRHP+r IrHQgiy9TCBFD9E0JEFjd3jtM+d4tg4NuLEiOE7gW7BaX9YV09F20kV4apV98w1fisB3 QDpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rl/Cb90nGPm0l1aJR4+irIRh+dlchsDFkczBk5KjQKojFSyTeXriVbXHy/ZDBiSw0PpGJ7zO2DTOx9NVA== X-Received: by 10.202.52.198 with SMTP id b189mr9192749oia.41.1477026260951; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 22:04:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.221.8 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 22:04:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2001:dc0:a000:4:a82e:ea0e:baf9:86b8] In-Reply-To: References: From: George Michaelson Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 15:04:20 +1000 Message-ID: To: sidr wg list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol - 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 05:04:24 -0000 ship it. On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Randy Bush wrote: > i believe i already responded, but just in case. > > have read, have used, no ill affects detected. ship it. > > randy > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Fri Oct 21 00:30:46 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9304D1293DC for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:30:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.368 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.368 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 gLnuQLInAGZS for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp13.cnnic.cn [218.241.118.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA3A41293D6 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from LIUXD (unknown [218.241.103.235]) by ocmail02.zx.nicx.cn (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf0A5QZUhxAlYIP9EBg--.39820S3; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 15:30:41 +0800 (CST) From: "Yu Fu" To: References: In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 15:30:48 +0800 Message-ID: <01cd01d22b6d$0b994770$22cbd650$@cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01CE_01D22BB0.19BC8770" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AdIq3Q4bHfkg1t02SaOAnNOhJzY2sgAjstXg Content-Language: zh-cn X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf0A5QZUhxAlYIP9EBg--.39820S3 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjDUn29KB7ZKAUJUUUUU529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7v73 VFW2AGmfu7bjvjm3AaLaJ3UjIYCTnIWjp_UUUYC7k0a2IF6F4UM7kC6x804xWl14x267AK xVWUJVW8JwAFc2x0x2IEx4CE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWrJVCq3wAFIxvE14AKwVWUJVWUGw A2ocxC64kIII0Yj41l84x0c7CEw4AK67xGY2AK021l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvE14v26F1j 6w1UM28EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26F4j6r4UJwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26r xl6s0DM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW0oVCq3wAS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv 0487Mc02F40Eb7x2x7xS6ryj6rWUMc02F40E57IF67AEF4xIwI1l5I8CrVAKz4kIr2xC04 v26r4j6ryUMc02F40E42I26xC2a48xMcIj6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r1j6r18McIj6I8E87Iv 67AKxVWUJVW8JwAm72CE4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1lF7xvr2IYc2Ij64vIr41lc2xSY4AK67 AK6r4xMxAIw28IcxkI7VAKI48JMxC20s026xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r4UMI8I3I0E5I8CrVAF wI0_JrI_JrWlx2IqxVCjr7xvwVAFwI0_JrI_JrWlx4CE17CEb7AF67AKxVWUJVWUXwCIc4 0Y0x0EwIxGrwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r1j6r1xMIIF0xvE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AK xVWUJVW8JwCI42IY6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_WFyUJVCq3wCI42IY6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJV W8JwCI42IY6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26r1j6r4UYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07jn2-nU UUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: pix13q5fqqxugofq/ Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol - 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 07:30:45 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01CE_01D22BB0.19BC8770 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, I have read this draft and believe it is useful for the synchronization. Please ship it. Yu ------=_NextPart_000_01CE_01D22BB0.19BC8770 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,

 

I have read this draft and believe it is useful for the synchronization.

Please ship it.

 

Yu

 

------=_NextPart_000_01CE_01D22BB0.19BC8770-- From nobody Fri Oct 21 01:10:13 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEBEE1294F6; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 01:10:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=icloud.com 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 R7mZiD8d_CVB; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 01:10:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pv33p07im-ztdg10141401.me.com (pv33p07im-ztdg10141401.me.com [17.142.253.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A976912946B; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 01:10:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process-dkim-sign-daemon.pv33p07im-ztdg10141401.me.com by pv33p07im-ztdg10141401.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) id <0OFE00F0016X0A00@pv33p07im-ztdg10141401.me.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 08:10:09 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=icloud.com; s=4d515a; t=1477037409; bh=PJuFTdHYMa+W5L2ogA8Kw6hHnnigXN/q6drCHA4h2Hg=; h=Content-type:MIME-version:Subject:From:Date:Message-id:To; b=CRPjxyaX4MjX00ucxXvy0u9CWpwKhzDBhu/cJLIwG4zJOZJLd5JDOeYIuxXK1J0cN zQ4AnqRcNVL5+qeY/ZBKqLx0pkbkZgyU+s03P3+Uh99TKqa2BGJlJhrc8ASWsw1TfT G2DW6AU/CjQIk6hClWiL2MOhuy0swABUYfFHd1NGT0v440vq3Z/3dyMdTwHyBDXzj/ vAswKR+7mRLpGsAvNn1xuY+vV+uPEEF4dz9M0HkvEkGpJX2LnCnnFnJC9w2MJN/HPM vTmP/TnjIk31wSNOaCfcT9kIj9ktDQAbmp4bK/k9aRCIw7SkrLRlHpqZBn4q2ZZss/ XE25y747r96KA== Received: from [192.168.219.15] (unknown [124.17.24.252]) by pv33p07im-ztdg10141401.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) with ESMTPSA id <0OFE00B3M1CR6D10@pv33p07im-ztdg10141401.me.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 08:10:08 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2016-10-21_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1034 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1603290000 definitions=main-1610210147 Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Declan Ma In-reply-to: Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:10:02 +0800 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: References: To: Christopher Morrow X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Cc: Chris Morrow , sidr-ads@ietf.org, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 08:10:11 -0000 Speaking as an RP software developer, I think this document is ready = for the next step. My team is working to make RPSTIR support this algorithm. Di > =D4=DA 2016=C4=EA10=D4=C220=C8=D5=A3=AC22:18=A3=ACChristopher Morrow = =D0=B4=B5=C0=A3=BA >=20 > Howdy WG Folks! >=20 > Have we read this document and do we have opinions on it's intended = status/direction/content/the-moon? >=20 > Thanks! (5 days til timers go off) >=20 > -chris >=20 > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Chris Morrow = wrote: > Howdy WG folks! > The authors of: > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered >=20 > believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the > request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if > appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. >=20 > The abstract for this draft is: > "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation > procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational > fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while > retaining essential security features." >=20 > Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts = please, > this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. >=20 > thanks for reading/replying/thinking! > -chris > co-chair-persona >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Fri Oct 21 09:19:57 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFDD61297B8 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:19:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sn3rd.com 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 vhP3SWyx1pMA for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:19:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A2F0129664 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:19:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id f128so154605004qkb.1 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:19:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sn3rd.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ZKSZlcdmf1gyCqMgPcEX/rnS/76wwbuy4Jb9oqdxIXo=; b=Szin8AQf95uSTA6ru+G+4IO029Fy+PxwUA6RNITpLP5dFkEIRwEtic7KtbraDadAog FA5BZS95FuPEBd7jGpAH0i4ebbhiF1/unP6qthMDyn5YFW4veMm8q1nAnh/AQYBQzZ16 FFNfZRSkp6AGcGfulMLW4RJD9dpFn30w85LXM= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ZKSZlcdmf1gyCqMgPcEX/rnS/76wwbuy4Jb9oqdxIXo=; b=bEuK8XXwHap2wXStP/0e8TPLCVstBzYB7KKw87v4HNOImbBl3M3hiYZdI3zdF7RlNa gJ2uK0EdiaQakeX0hMDSXXI58jABS2zC63A+8DsRwBPgXBp1rWIedBsEdGsrjcXUVmSe UZxBouEBXZ9YFxnH7vC6YdSI+hyfT+le8GB0fsN53XzRPGjIoltRMQOhYOsn2ukNr5ci nYL2z/7AkT+kjHrqTHeC7cz9FeI0Ws64RNfZmdA6bfNSm5DBVRq4ILenNFtzt/yUkhFy xbyGyT+6u5T6F7j7Ubsgl3VEQDRrfgRQcYMj4pTmM+5hy6sZHyI1FNr57nIDoEJCpQm/ uHbg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdF6p8PkBSNAILfpaohVsAJ1DSjBodZFj3NxZfMZKFG+Jnhcla26RwTwiTa6LfPjg== X-Received: by 10.55.192.146 with SMTP id v18mr1883596qkv.207.1477066792638; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.0.112] ([96.231.229.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l57sm1720112qta.8.2016.10.21.09.19.51 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:19:51 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Sean Turner In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 12:19:49 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <99BE9523-BDE5-4BEE-A6F1-01A2C2F42A17@sn3rd.com> References: To: Christopher Morrow X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Cc: Chris Morrow , sidr-ads@ietf.org, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol - 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:19:56 -0000 This whole concept is analogous to existing DAP/LDAP mechanism and the = =E2=80=9Cdelta=E2=80=9D concept in CRLs. Considering this protocol is = run over https it seems like a step in the right direction away from = unsecured rsync. So the idea seems sensible and after re-reading the = draft I think we are a go for launch [0]. spt [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DzVf-rehP4b8 > On Oct 20, 2016, at 10:19, Christopher Morrow = wrote: >=20 > Howdy! > 5 more days until this call expires, please read and comment... or at = least say: > "Hey! I did read this it is = [awesome|horrible|acceptable|dumpsterfire]" >=20 > thanks! > -chris > (feel free to cut/paste/edit the quote if it'll save you time) >=20 > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Chris Morrow = wrote: >=20 > Howdy WG Folks! > Let's chat (email) about the subject document: > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol >=20 > The authors believe they have dealt with all open items and are > interested in moving this document forward to IESG for > publication. Let's have a read/write/arithmetic time with the draft > and send comments/questions/suggestions/etc to the list for the > authors to handle or, possibly just: "yea! move this document along!" > if you believe it's ready for the next step in it's lifecycle. >=20 > The WGLC should end 10/25/2016 - October 25th 2016. >=20 > The abstract for this document is: > "In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), certificate > authorities publish certificates, including end entity = certificates, > Certificate Revocation Lists (CRL), and RPKI signed objects to > repositories. Relying Parties (RP) retrieve the published > information from those repositories. This document specifies a = delta > protocol which provides relying parties with a mechanism to query a > repository for incremental updates, thus enabling the RP to keep = its > state in sync with the repository." >=20 > thanks! > -chris > co-chair-persona >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Fri Oct 21 16:24:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietf.org Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1568B12987C; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:21:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" To: , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.36.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <147709207208.28214.1653316801353412685.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:21:12 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: sidr@ietf.org Subject: [sidr] sidr - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 97 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 23:21:12 -0000 Dear Sandra Murphy, The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is the scheduled session information followed by the original request. sidr Session 1 (2:30:00) Thursday, Afternoon Session II 1520-1750 Room Name: Studio 2 size: 80 --------------------------------------------- Request Information: --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Secure Inter-Domain Routing Area Name: Routing Area Session Requester: Sandra Murphy Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 2.5 Hours Number of Attendees: 90 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: opsec idr grow saag rtgwg rtgarea Second Priority: dane i2rs isis trill lamps Special Requests: --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Tue Oct 25 08:03:11 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 818351296A9; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:03:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 1RwVpgtAF3OA; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:03:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B8731296B2; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:03:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id o68so262290586qkf.3; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:03:03 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=sgTZNXtyuvkwmXi7tyLcF9lW1xhVtibK7WAxc8wCKrQ=; b=ZocR4tEzaI/6qEEAVKXlpGlWElB5zxHyCTMec/afvaLd9TaBYkm3hRe5iK5B7y6fRJ Gj2HafCQ4QUPTyCMINckLCSDWvSsbfmIiNNUq5YOEgV2y8Occygep3UbFiueRdEL2bHB 76+SVzwcGm7sLgKc5TQfb/Ah3G/NlmtZPRbbVLjZUaAEuUdU/wf68zyNyow6ij1NCaeA u495eWlnEn97Qbez3poDeKJasv95CAudAB/xgUqe8QQtsXCgTo2tUT7Fe8LaJzhglY0V bGs1iFyAEiI/Wy4VodnnRKWo1yS1amMXBGhGwOpb1PnuTuTqGQkSjWV71uXYltAm+l23 Vz9Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=sgTZNXtyuvkwmXi7tyLcF9lW1xhVtibK7WAxc8wCKrQ=; b=Rin6/Fby8iP01i8uP/FwuJOTaQCltkEHCFZpjVvEo4Cmf1k3lg79q19ljg9F74rH5F DfHa4h5jRFIhQLQQX0Oo7OKiM/V+ixxr122Z+nWqQDBT36SK612DPTdodZuBJ15AvJWA 82EMqmd8uglBbbqGOeWJwVjdNi9HD2VRcIGEq2iQhi0mAURgQIz1T2bd6JoAb/Qb/cZL K4AwHQG1CyEJyhSWP8N2LHyW1QRj23uTaSClIS3fig0CcjvjlOBY+oXymVixdXZk8lTS 7VOHQAWnVXnF3esXw7b1kHwlr2I2DQSLemuxmVCBtGnT6EvFm8quy67fcDoHOSpObLBR 44nw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfEy3j2dEVz5fIETMMmYc5aU2B3XTgTz79fXhkQhJsFdgAtrzc8oBCEofLKGoQDFH/SICgH+nadeQq2lg== X-Received: by 10.55.3.140 with SMTP id 134mr22303065qkd.65.1477407782450; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:03:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:03:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <99a31951-b095-eaee-0c44-9358ce2d989a@bbn.com> References: <8E32FD39-FD20-455C-8BEC-5752DE9C8531@tislabs.com> <99a31951-b095-eaee-0c44-9358ce2d989a@bbn.com> From: Christopher Morrow Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:03:01 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: RYP6oMd9wg0MQYQx6B2pyl-nDLo Message-ID: To: "sidr@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114c99680fc658053fb1ce61 Archived-At: Cc: "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] wglc for draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions-00 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:03:08 -0000 --001a114c99680fc658053fb1ce61 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Howdy folks! This WGLC ended up being a bit more of a long discussion than I anticipated... I think since this WGLC there have been 2 document updates to catch comments/concerns/etc and I think deal with them properly. I don't see anymore chatter for this document after 9/2/2016, so I think we should move this document forward to IESG.. I'll be sending along a pub request today. -chris On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Stephen Kent wrote: > Tim, > > > > Thanks for taking the time to read and comment on the document. > > > > I will change CA certificate analysis to be section 2.1, and make the CRL > section b 2.3, as per your request. The Manifest section will remain 2.2, > ROAs will become 2.4, GB will become 2.5, and Router Certificates will > remain 2.6. This will require a lot of changes to the pointers within and > between sections, but we aim to please :-). > > > > A-5.4.1: I agree that reducing the set of resources in a CA certificate > may be done for legitimate reasons, even if the INR holder does not agree > with the reduction. Nonetheless, this is an adverse action from the > perspective of the INR holder. It=E2=80=99s important to note that there = are cases > when this reduction is the result of an attack against or an error by the > parent CA. Thus I believe it is important to retain this action in the > list. > > > > > > A-5.4.2: I=E2=80=99ll delete this action. > > > > A-5.4.5: I agree that this may be hard to distinguish from a legitimate > key rollover, except that a key rollover would have both old and new CA > keys present simultaneously. I=E2=80=99ll add a note to this effect. > > > > I disagree with your suggestion that we remove the modification, > revocation, and injection actions for Manifests, ROAs, and Router > Certificates. First, remember that adverse actions include errors by CAs, > and transient attacks against CAs. In the former case the private key is > clearly available and the CA may also control the repository. In the latt= er > case note that an attacker need not need learn the private key=E2=80=99s = value; > he/she needs only the ability to cause an HSM to use the key. Also, an > attacker need not control the repository to effect these actions; an RP > might be misdirected to a different set of files via a routing system > attack (ironic?) or a DNS attack. > > > > Recall that the goal of this document is to document, as best we can, a > wide range of actions that are adverse, irrespective of whether we can > prevent or detect such actions. Your message noted that RRDP may make it > easier for RPs to detect some of these actions; I suggest you add > references to the relevant sections of this document as further motivatio= n > for transitioning to RRDP. > > > > Finally, when we revised an earlier version of the document we decided to > include every action in the same order in each section (except for GB > records, where it would be trivial), to make it easier for a reader to se= e > that we were addressing the same issues for each object. > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > > --001a114c99680fc658053fb1ce61 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Howdy folks!
This WGLC ended up being a bit more of a = long discussion than I anticipated... I think since this WGLC there have be= en 2 document updates to catch comments/concerns/etc and I think deal with = them properly.

I don't see anymore chatter for= this document after 9/2/2016, so I think we should move this document forw= ard to IESG.. I'll be sending along a pub request today.

=
-chris

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>= ; wrote:
=20 =20 =20

=20

=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20

Tim,

=C2= =A0

Thanks for taking the time to read and comment on the document.

=C2= =A0

I will change CA certificate analysis to be section 2.1, and make the CRL section b 2.3, as per your request. The Manifest section will remain 2.2, ROAs will become 2.4, GB will become 2.5, and Router Certificates will remain 2.6. This will require a lot of changes to the pointers within and between sections, but we aim to please :-).<= /p>

=C2= =A0

A-5.4.1: I agree that reducing the set of=C2=A0 resources in a CA certificate may be done for legitimate reasons, even if the INR holder does not agree with the reduction. Nonetheless, this is an adverse action from the perspective of the INR holder. It=E2=80=99s important to note that there are cases when this reduction is the result of an attack against or an error by the parent CA. Thus I believe it is important to retain this action in the list.

=C2= =A0

=C2= =A0

A-5.4.2: I=E2=80=99ll delete this action.

=C2= =A0

A-5.4.5: I agree that this may be hard to distinguish from a legitimate key rollover, except that a key rollover would have both old and new CA keys present simultaneously. I=E2=80=99ll add a note to this effect.

=C2= =A0

I disagree with your suggestion that we remove the modification, revocation, and injection actions for Manifests, ROAs, and Router Certificates. First, remember that adverse actions include errors by CAs, and transient attacks against CAs. In the former case the private key is clearly available and the CA may also control the repository. In the latter case note that an attacker need not need learn the private key=E2=80=99s value; he/she needs only the ability to cause an HSM to use the key. Also, an attacker need not control the repository to effect these actions; an RP might be misdirected to a different set of files via a routing system attack (ironic?) or a DNS attack.

=C2= =A0

Recall that the goal of this document is to document, as best we can, a wide range of actions that are adverse, irrespective of whether we can prevent or detect such actions. Your message noted that RRDP may make it easier for RPs to detect some of these actions; I suggest you add references to the relevant sections of this document as further motivation for transitioning to RRDP.

=C2= =A0

Finally, when we revised an earlier version of the document we decided to include every action in the same order in each section (except for GB records, where it would be trivial), to make it easier for a reader to see that we were addressing the same issues for each object.

=20

Steve

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


--001a114c99680fc658053fb1ce61-- From nobody Tue Oct 25 08:30:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E8191294BE for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:30:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.332 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.332 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 xunc4rViVtMB for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:30:12 -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 A333F1296A0 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nova.tislabs.com (unknown [10.66.1.77]) by walnut.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D35028B0041 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:30:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nova.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE0E61F8056; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:30:11 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_31C00F49-4A74-436D-807C-AE8C06870F3D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail From: Sandra Murphy In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:30:00 -0400 Message-Id: References: To: sidr X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Cc: Sandra Murphy Subject: Re: [sidr] Seoul/IETF97 Meeting Agenda Request X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:30:24 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_31C00F49-4A74-436D-807C-AE8C06870F3D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Nagging again. Draft wg agendas are due 31 Oct, which is this coming Monday, =E2=80=A2 2016-10-31 (Monday): Internet Draft submission cut-off = (for all drafts, including -00) by UTC 23:59, upload using IETF ID = Submission Tool. Six days from now. That=E2=80=99s the draft deadline, of course, subject to change. Any topics to discuss, please inform the list and/or chairs. =E2=80=94Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs > On Oct 20, 2016, at 10:18 AM, Christopher Morrow = wrote: >=20 > Howdy! > So far, with 20 days to go.. there are 2 folk asking for time... > (or possibly I didn't document requests which is totally possible!) >=20 > If your name isn't Declan Ma or Joel Jaeggli and you had plans to = present something in Seoul, please contact the sidr-chairs@ietf.org for = scheduling! >=20 > -chris >=20 > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Chris Morrow = wrote: >=20 > howdy SIDR folk, >=20 > So far there's 1 requested slot, we have possibly 2.5 hrs to discuss > the goings-on of SIDR. >=20 > Please send your agenda time requests forth-with! >=20 > Please also make sure that your slides are available to the chairs by > Monday morning (11/14/2016)... slides received after will be less > likely to be available for use during the meeting. >=20 > -chris > co-chairing-this-event >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr --Apple-Mail=_31C00F49-4A74-436D-807C-AE8C06870F3D 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 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYD3qDAAoJEHplpQeet0IZPZQP/icgedVz+fHhv6gsHA8uR/Dn K+vwXQ5Td+fd1oPYH1PL2xynitskbuPx6d6I6tIYEDuzXw1e8DONgqFlRKd3Ri8x wl1Pwy4LDg+ON+SqdQtYqbCYLwdFD3EfOP6LsSVV3oYANkpr6is0JG6yIIBKGSsd QMc2kbiH+Pyfg5WaosMKUVPexXkY4W6F7lfk4ADEBac0a7cwuNiFInMUv4uEkzD7 oc7QqwkJr6YJs7sFMiDtc73EDdekIPlQlHHe05CsuUfOEG88m76lDrUz0AkujgxH rFVa664/5Mi0tXyyHAKCDLps+AtFTrz0anAc9xi/4BiFjcRIHOpMfVSiiKKv81uS k2nx7dhBCP1/i/gcQFLThVougcO2uO4rDzefbtf0arAb0OXxJU+Vg+Xz9xhwv9bH UC/9BBzWHko/k31aQaKsrVeI2EcXra6TraBV54vGaEbUZCe4EQNl7TJJQy+5P600 u6EpFDWECGkDKBtrLgw1utZzT/E2e3DmNJGBh5i1OIVw6dAIWAdhhurnyfZpXq8u FLxFiH8zV3Klo2IxxVfFhx73KdJBhQG3zOLG3luXrMc2h7dCKYCIMCB/oWnUmDWA aLpFO1CM+NuJrCiXujLCl8+t8YfS32HfN3uoLRP7bn+8ODdaIFFk9HIUDtXWPwsv JZF/Y4gHGx5tCFeYl0gD =kOlD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_31C00F49-4A74-436D-807C-AE8C06870F3D-- From nobody Tue Oct 25 08:55:42 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770021295CC for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:55:40 -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 autolearn_force=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 VSArUCXuTLi8 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:55:39 -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 90E12129580 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nova.tislabs.com (unknown [10.66.1.77]) by walnut.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0519328B003B; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:55:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nova.tislabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F087E1F8056; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:55:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Sandra Murphy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:55:38 -0400 Message-Id: To: sidr Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Cc: Sandra Murphy Subject: [sidr] upcoming deadlines for IETF 97 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:55:40 -0000 Might as well give the full list of reminders/nags: =E2=80=A2 2016-10-31 (Monday): Internet Draft submission cut-off = (for all drafts, including -00) by UTC 23:59, upload using IETF ID = Submission Tool. =E2=80=A2 2016-10-31 (Monday): Draft Working Group agendas due = by UTC 23:59, upload using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. =E2=80=A2 2016-11-04 (Friday): Early Bird registration and = payment cut-off at UTC 23:59. =E2=80=A2 2016-11-07 (Monday): Revised Working Group agendas due = by UTC 23:59, upload using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. =E2=80=A2 2016-11-07 (Monday): Registration cancellation cut-off = at UTC 23:59. =E2=80=A2 2016-11-11 (Friday): Final Pre-Registration and = Pre-Payment cut-off at 17:00 local meeting time. =E2=80=94Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs= From nobody Tue Oct 25 19:31:42 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietf.org Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A75126CD8; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 19:31:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.36.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <147744909838.29412.10669944659768288936.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 19:31:38 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: sidr@ietf.org Subject: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover-06.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 02:31:38 -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 of the IETF. Title : BGPsec Router Certificate Rollover Authors : Roque Gagliano Brian Weis Keyur Patel Filename : draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover-06.txt Pages : 10 Date : 2016-10-25 Abstract: BGPsec will need to address the impact from regular and emergency rollover processes for the BGPsec End-Entity (EE) certificates that will be performed by Certificate Authorities (CAs) participating at the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). Rollovers of BGPsec EE certificates must be carefully managed in order to synchronize distribution of router public keys and the usage of those pubic keys by BGPsec routers. This document provides general recommendations for that process, as well as describing reasons why the rollover of BGPsec EE certificates might be necessary. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover-06 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover-06 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 Tue Oct 25 20:13:15 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 088DD129A10; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:13:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nistgov.onmicrosoft.com 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 fV1OaYTVTPtU; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gcc01-dm2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm2gcc01on0133.outbound.protection.outlook.com [23.103.201.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D8C712940C; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:13:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nistgov.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-nist-gov; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=W2FBDfprEgc5rsgVR3UYsWg7xyNjmtJtHEJZ6MQXhak=; b=NOQs7pgYiWkK9UZ/Ptt45dhD7Y3tJM8mP6GvCfpdcB8CQPgzL2gvZtmVLDetqlc7L5gPp67FbRfjdMEmZIV02KZmw9kUnbactqsBwlLYaf0C6tOmZy6v6ySw0jbkSEOrxFOKjdluxyVlGQ0F8hXy1Ym2EFAmldSVEQlPRN+5W/M= Received: from DM2PR09MB0446.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.161.252.145) by DM2PR09MB0448.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.161.252.147) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.679.12; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 03:13:09 +0000 Received: from DM2PR09MB0446.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.252.145]) by DM2PR09MB0446.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.252.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0679.015; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 03:13:09 +0000 From: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" To: Chris Morrow , "sidr@ietf.org" , "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr-ads@ietf.org" , Tim Bruijnzeels Thread-Topic: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 Thread-Index: AQHSI8j/I/O4kS89i0qcRGjR216wO6C6JKNL Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 03:13:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov; x-originating-ip: [108.51.40.221] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1ed3049a-989e-4286-31e5-08d3fd4e0326 x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR09MB0448; 7:zQQPc3NpDtPuAWS/YsZjKwjwFWttM28zKanlgCtCsbTu57L9P+XQQ8RvdXtXNuLN5zIERo9daX5hHtjub7+va+qcyRQ0W6qKnYpFDHl3AqIKBuYyO9QmTWWyp556eJJ8qCdju1cuyP6QmTevTIy9hVWTRLN9LorOln97RUmKoIra0ecIpZ92plMZ8eQw0BTL4KQGRvQDLy6cXbd33cKRBnMrk2twlctbIY+XnLJXdNJUv8ZFQtQz8ZVKO4eCDyc4seVC0CUL1RaYWkfaxA0xtrv/qv8aA9ZodtZW8OSLuIXghVtBL7zILu1z5DC/CI6Tp2YJ3U693OGXBWPZ0EbN1ExVRsy6UGQwVkOTIvy6tu8= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR09MB0448; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(192374486261705); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040176)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026); SRVR:DM2PR09MB0448; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR09MB0448; x-forefront-prvs: 0107098B6C x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(199003)(189002)(5423002)(377454003)(7696004)(5660300001)(586003)(2950100002)(122556002)(54356999)(81166006)(305945005)(6116002)(76176999)(50986999)(9686002)(10400500002)(3846002)(2906002)(106356001)(105586002)(2900100001)(99286002)(106116001)(15975445007)(81156014)(92566002)(68736007)(102836003)(76576001)(11100500001)(5002640100001)(3900700001)(87936001)(2501003)(189998001)(19580405001)(66066001)(19580395003)(107886002)(77096005)(7846002)(230783001)(3660700001)(3280700002)(8936002)(7736002)(5001770100001)(101416001)(33656002)(97736004)(2201001)(86362001)(74316002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR09MB0448; H:DM2PR09MB0446.namprd09.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nist.gov does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Oct 2016 03:13:08.9111 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2ab5d82f-d8fa-4797-a93e-054655c61dec X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR09MB0448 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 03:13:13 -0000 I read the draft once again. I support publication. Found a minor typo in the last paragraph on p.15 (can be dealt with during = RFC editor review process): s/the loss of on IP address prefix from the VRS-IP/the loss of one IP addre= ss prefix from the VRS-IP/ Sriram ________________________________________ From: sidr on behalf of Chris Morrow Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:08 AM To: sidr@ietf.org; sidr-chairs@ietf.org; sidr-ads@ietf.org Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends = 10/25/2016 Howdy WG folks! The authors of: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. The abstract for this draft is: "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while retaining essential security features." Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts please, this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. thanks for reading/replying/thinking! -chris co-chair-persona _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Wed Oct 26 07:43:58 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E89E51294B5; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:43:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 VwHskYDm9Bgh; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:43:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x236.google.com (mail-qt0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3EB21294C6; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:43:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x236.google.com with SMTP id r21so4369929qtr.4; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:43:54 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=PYcbztKUxTGlO5wxK9TTa1HgM4eOHhDtENkLGEV2ric=; b=DK7dzlYEzv6h3fmW0SjRrEqFRv8JRikWZkMaLhi7nzOcjdmqhIBCz4Qqu5J7Eueneu u36GiZOhWd0SNftLcc+RNeiNJmacwcpAORc13mC2Ln4/0noIOHOM0djEW+6KGvWNMqsh PxdVAW9vkhbID33+rcrhEefjWIPYCGT7XG2j6+pWsAK5hAFewoJderpdOGEl29nW9rxN slGz3+iqPfMpbMZkEjykSL2tfAOQv9g0lWJGzKDjZo6RjFJ1kMA4dbVkWeTuRz6PDyc8 HFgm8p740X0Q76TsCo6HTvO3uwuMdpaa12yagNBqphEsGxCDIvsvDc1s0o8MaFLyin36 Bs7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PYcbztKUxTGlO5wxK9TTa1HgM4eOHhDtENkLGEV2ric=; b=NEW0IsLWrsChQWlEW8ioGhX9TWTnM25v5WN7jZ8B4aoO9RX/I98Vwp1BNdj9Q/qFNV HR+FwEsRE79Pv8QjRYOGq1ufKo4GKnOnEYYDWRJAkOA53ltkxViV6KVkx5So7ZbvynI5 zB9b1C55hacs9emfuwVdOlRMibFiKjGB1GALK7tbZjmhYr6amzkTYAb6S7stlGVkiqSt XfHYqMTY7ZGFjmzyNxqUjrEHTHlcLQT2ZmvhAm9eBmBEtMPJFrY/TWvwFB91wcFZK8pQ XL8Efb1LaQ3mufmur6T6UsSHTF/4rpfEXImk4vYlqukCyqmfuhs5z/Do3v9UHnXEe7xA +YvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdawYcQna/1BCrxOdMlWdIaQYkgxtBawWT5owdjvOywpwk78UcNV7Zb1kewrOAc6k4457it2ewIiwq4HQ== X-Received: by 10.237.56.137 with SMTP id k9mr2066004qte.131.1477493033681; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:43:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:43:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <99BE9523-BDE5-4BEE-A6F1-01A2C2F42A17@sn3rd.com> References: <99BE9523-BDE5-4BEE-A6F1-01A2C2F42A17@sn3rd.com> From: Christopher Morrow Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:43:53 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: --VmPzFTSkDM3MP4nAw8qv6ISpo Message-ID: To: Sean Turner Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11405caa6e5107053fc5a7e4 Archived-At: Cc: Chris Morrow , sidr-ads@ietf.org, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol - 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 14:43:57 -0000 --001a11405caa6e5107053fc5a7e4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks for reading (everyone) and commenting (many folks) this is being sent forward to the IESG now. On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Sean Turner wrote: > This whole concept is analogous to existing DAP/LDAP mechanism and the > =E2=80=9Cdelta=E2=80=9D concept in CRLs. Considering this protocol is ru= n over https it > seems like a step in the right direction away from unsecured rsync. So t= he > idea seems sensible and after re-reading the draft I think we are a go fo= r > launch [0]. > > spt > > [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DzVf-rehP4b8 > > > On Oct 20, 2016, at 10:19, Christopher Morrow > wrote: > > > > Howdy! > > 5 more days until this call expires, please read and comment... or at > least say: > > "Hey! I did read this it is [awesome|horrible|acceptable| > dumpsterfire]" > > > > thanks! > > -chris > > (feel free to cut/paste/edit the quote if it'll save you time) > > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Chris Morrow > wrote: > > > > Howdy WG Folks! > > Let's chat (email) about the subject document: > > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol > > > > The authors believe they have dealt with all open items and are > > interested in moving this document forward to IESG for > > publication. Let's have a read/write/arithmetic time with the draft > > and send comments/questions/suggestions/etc to the list for the > > authors to handle or, possibly just: "yea! move this document along!" > > if you believe it's ready for the next step in it's lifecycle. > > > > The WGLC should end 10/25/2016 - October 25th 2016. > > > > The abstract for this document is: > > "In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), certificate > > authorities publish certificates, including end entity certificates, > > Certificate Revocation Lists (CRL), and RPKI signed objects to > > repositories. Relying Parties (RP) retrieve the published > > information from those repositories. This document specifies a delt= a > > protocol which provides relying parties with a mechanism to query a > > repository for incremental updates, thus enabling the RP to keep its > > state in sync with the repository." > > > > thanks! > > -chris > > co-chair-persona > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > --001a11405caa6e5107053fc5a7e4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks for reading (everyone) and commenting (many folks)<= div>
this is being sent forward to the IESG now.
<= div class=3D"gmail_extra">
On Fri, Oct 21, 20= 16 at 12:19 PM, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> wrote:
This whole concept is analogous to existing DAP/LDAP= mechanism and the =E2=80=9Cdelta=E2=80=9D concept in CRLs.=C2=A0 Consideri= ng this protocol is run over https it seems like a step in the right direct= ion away from unsecured rsync.=C2=A0 So the idea seems sensible and after r= e-reading the draft I think we are a go for launch [0].

spt

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DzVf-rehP4b8<= /a>

> On Oct 20, 2016, at 10:19, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Howdy!
> 5 more days until this call expires, please read and comment... or at = least say:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0"Hey! I did read this it is [awesome|horrible|accepta= ble|dumpsterfire]"
>
> thanks!
> -chris
> (feel free to cut/paste/edit the quote if it'll save you time)
>
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net> wrote:
>
> Howdy WG Folks!
> Let's chat (email) about the subject document:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol
>
> The authors believe they have dealt with all open items and are
> interested in moving this document forward to IESG for
> publication. Let's have a read/write/arithmetic time with the draf= t
> and send comments/questions/suggestions/etc to the list for the > authors to handle or, possibly just: "yea! move this document alo= ng!"
> if you believe it's ready for the next step in it's lifecycle.=
>
> The WGLC should end 10/25/2016 - October 25th 2016.
>
> The abstract for this document is:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0"In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), ce= rtificate
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 authorities publish certificates, including end entity ce= rtificates,
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Certificate Revocation Lists (CRL), and RPKI signed objec= ts to
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 repositories.=C2=A0 Relying Parties (RP) retrieve the pub= lished
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 information from those repositories.=C2=A0 This document = specifies a delta
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 protocol which provides relying parties with a mechanism = to query a
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 repository for incremental updates, thus enabling the RP = to keep its
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 state in sync with the repository."
>
> thanks!
> -chris
> co-chair-persona
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

--001a11405caa6e5107053fc5a7e4-- From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:32:17 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0669E12964F; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 EVIEDWIob-r7; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B8921279EB; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id n189so9042935qke.0; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:11 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=pLbGgtgh/kEs/RcHOatRA8SeeYOy8z8ZTkJ0pIAOnDQ=; b=W5Li4GBmCcb1urWt8EbiYfPYEfbHw3UQwbr/LB3rczaU6k30055FdVuJfRDGiDLNpy OqXeHPWriZJUO3aBXlWSgkTI4HT8ZywWK2smZlKIU9IWwW/5qjefVvOQxzAyhqb/zfSm wZN/c+4KDOnfb6OIjbfR+hTTGDZrqkNAznEgWA+rAd48JJlyEOA+OGZ5miJXKFhsxuf0 lBQ0kUGR0KYH7NZF8/D2jIQiGP6b7E4KJJvPEwf3uislHhZJ6HkZYTHZ1MP6PSgPPuXB kGu9Oi//ru1K+BkCZJE37iSznHKMRXlD+7HUGowznelXYjjdP7lu5kGRrN5FOkJuDPk4 MCjA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pLbGgtgh/kEs/RcHOatRA8SeeYOy8z8ZTkJ0pIAOnDQ=; b=NfmMFzLP4NkgkPpfhdCboFum8tzYTI9rf2vdPYta0rUtnHkTASQMAoW9/fkRInJ0JO dqtkuDR+CflNmQgB0uDjoJf892acibQnLXK3nJPEFC8cHv90X1olxx9LGBPJ3sPTSCsn eFEDuUQdrTjLTk6fTIn44Ps4lez6sRpiv+/5NkznIRQ9uBIIsujOsovFfycd0ItF0Bx4 HiDJI+djRG4OeDzpEhM4EKqEvU63oiai0c2i5Ns/MB5B7M5myLBPWQM4yLcoHQZFR2kP M/k8q3MbJnQfcSVol3+2qwWUs9f0iog97BkyqcZUYji/WFf+8yH/7X10Jn8DEWgF0v96 jFSg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfkBxqvkZH9uvPXxQGsfp5Q02sEPaPuU1YZ3X1lgshwcU0GeCQ1Ex7J9y+tl4CqrnLs1UN2dQx/lhjE7Q== X-Received: by 10.55.129.6 with SMTP id c6mr2559208qkd.4.1477495930630; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Morrow Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:32:10 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: -etil_TM5GKLUatM5arZf3msMA4 Message-ID: To: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c05cd801a4102053fc65413 Archived-At: Cc: Chris Morrow , "sidr-ads@ietf.org" , "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:32:16 -0000 --94eb2c05cd801a4102053fc65413 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 howdy! it's past 10/25, so... I think despite seeing only 2 folk reply I think this document should move forward, so I'll send up a pub-request shortly. On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) < kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov> wrote: > I read the draft once again. I support publication. > > Found a minor typo in the last paragraph on p.15 (can be dealt with during > RFC editor review process): > s/the loss of on IP address prefix from the VRS-IP/the loss of one IP > address prefix from the VRS-IP/ > > Sriram > > ________________________________________ > From: sidr on behalf of Chris Morrow < > morrowc@ops-netman.net> > Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:08 AM > To: sidr@ietf.org; sidr-chairs@ietf.org; sidr-ads@ietf.org > Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - > ends 10/25/2016 > > Howdy WG folks! > The authors of: > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered > > believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the > request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if > appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. > > The abstract for this draft is: > "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation > procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational > fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while > retaining essential security features." > > Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts please, > this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. > > thanks for reading/replying/thinking! > -chris > co-chair-persona > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > --94eb2c05cd801a4102053fc65413 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
howdy! it's past 10/25, so... I think despite seeing o= nly 2 folk reply I think this document should move forward, so I'll sen= d up a pub-request shortly.

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fe= d) <kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov> wrote:
I read the draft once again. I support publicatio= n.

Found a minor typo in the last paragraph on p.15 (can be dealt with during = RFC editor review process):
s/the loss of on IP address prefix from the VRS-IP/the loss of one IP addre= ss prefix from the VRS-IP/

Sriram

________________________________________
From: sidr <sidr-bounces@ietf.o= rg> on behalf of Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:08 AM
To: sidr@ietf.org; sidr-chairs@ietf.org; sidr-ads@ietf.org
Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - = ends=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 10/25/2016

Howdy WG folks!
The authors of:
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered

believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the
request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if
appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication.

The abstract for this draft is:
=C2=A0 "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operat= ional
=C2=A0 =C2=A0fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0retaining essential security features."

Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts please= ,
this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016.

thanks for reading/replying/thinking!
-chris
co-chair-persona

_______________________________________________
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

--94eb2c05cd801a4102053fc65413-- From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:32:54 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A60BD12965D; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.331 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.331 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 4JKgVfPv6Cte; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mahimahi.ripe.net (mahimahi.ripe.net [IPv6:2001:67c:2e8:11::c100:1372]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9588012960A; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nene.ripe.net ([193.0.23.10]) by mahimahi.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bzQC1-00032r-WB; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:32:45 +0200 Received: from sslvpn.ripe.net ([193.0.20.230] helo=vpn-50.ripe.net) by nene.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bzQC1-0007hh-Pu; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:32:41 +0200 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Tim Bruijnzeels In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:32:39 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8E2E93F5-6184-4E58-8EF8-65C5D43E54A2@ripe.net> References: To: Sean Turner , "t.petch" , Russ Housley X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-ACL-Warn: Delaying message X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ---------- X-RIPE-Spam-Report: Spam Total Points: -10.7 points pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ -7.5 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-RIPE-Signature: 784d7acfe6559f2a0b602ec6519a071949d8140066c7bdc73f1bd743f0f6d11c Archived-At: Cc: Chris Morrow , "sidr-ads@ietf.org" , "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:32:53 -0000 Hi Sean, Tom, Russ, and all, Sorry for bringing this up late. Technically past 25 October, and yes I = would like to see this go through as you might expect from an author... That said, can someone with good ASN.1-fu please have look at the = changes w.r.t. ASN.1 structure and OIDs? I tried to include all your = comments properly - but I would feel safer if one of you could confirm. Thanks Tim > On 26 Oct 2016, at 05:13, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) = wrote: >=20 > I read the draft once again. I support publication. >=20 > Found a minor typo in the last paragraph on p.15 (can be dealt with = during RFC editor review process): > s/the loss of on IP address prefix from the VRS-IP/the loss of one IP = address prefix from the VRS-IP/ >=20 > Sriram >=20 > ________________________________________ > From: sidr on behalf of Chris Morrow = > Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:08 AM > To: sidr@ietf.org; sidr-chairs@ietf.org; sidr-ads@ietf.org > Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - = ends 10/25/2016 >=20 > Howdy WG folks! > The authors of: > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered >=20 > believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the > request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if > appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. >=20 > The abstract for this draft is: > "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation > procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational > fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while > retaining essential security features." >=20 > Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts = please, > this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. >=20 > thanks for reading/replying/thinking! > -chris > co-chair-persona >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:34:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2A6D129669; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:34:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 c9E8aEGPj11A; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:34:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x231.google.com (mail-qk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9C3F1279EB; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id n189so9082206qke.0; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:34:00 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=q9YMFugLR5Vay4lUU9b25c4M1A9RS1/Oj8YpFaRlySE=; b=KEiG62kNP3ii9wP2iJny3QKQ/8vEMJmo3pBoWko/AGr+xaZ8nnIq9rXoPG9cqJHwU0 SwjqP4NFLCeJdtiY4e0XCYF8nIGCS8kJ8ft5/+m6Uu7x7paJOcjinQAsC6Mj9h3cbeTb Onhk3Uj/Eocvqv+sblXeoH3WEn460T6NrMJIJ3ffyK1UmQ+3no+CM5P5epPtpz0zZggV h2YB5zF//bicNxOClX1+vgUaZxXijOqDt8ReGu5lNmYm3o6vbUMGW8ymEPa0vRwJAfZO LQKabGiBK/W5XAkNuxuM8tmdIu/ExP2g7V+iufDEkAvZjs+/esWupwv292gbJuZNTGuu iq3A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=q9YMFugLR5Vay4lUU9b25c4M1A9RS1/Oj8YpFaRlySE=; b=bwevhrfHTxfEHtMNgIQboJTySBmadRHTCoec2byS6oYfByQgp9p9al38BXHXlXVY3i 12iVeNgL1sd9hzAWjUL99FkGTenN8aiFGiGkt/NH/qygVRS8nR8xyzuXk/ybghAT4XPm /z2BvZDPDuipVfcVWqnrRASrPMdDL3IpuJMHMPC5DRzEFByvFVutkKJeJKHPYa4/b7Zp gdZyLEJIA22M2rU+hA6GBd+KbP31rtYGWYfh3xJOMNyEKXpi3cljsicNI1XZuQ5y3sBb M9D6iXQKn/xavPOQCoKhcKjl6E1MaLMHHAhcG8hKB/xnZ16fJ+6CIUZqLeYvTnmO+kzs z0jA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfG1uEOoJq3Qc8tLyXXGhkOB8rHfWvv5wAua2y1IRJnp6W++zu/YAT9S63iPU0vDoFbKkKg/HWLuyK1Nw== X-Received: by 10.233.223.132 with SMTP id t126mr2504098qkf.107.1477496039998; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:33:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:33:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8E2E93F5-6184-4E58-8EF8-65C5D43E54A2@ripe.net> References: <8E2E93F5-6184-4E58-8EF8-65C5D43E54A2@ripe.net> From: Christopher Morrow Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:33:59 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AVTYbC4Ao-3gnC00yM-K9zpQhZo Message-ID: To: Tim Bruijnzeels Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c043d289f0f11053fc65ac0 Archived-At: Cc: "sidr-ads@ietf.org" , Chris Morrow , "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:34:05 -0000 --94eb2c043d289f0f11053fc65ac0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I'll prepare the shepherd doc and await an ack/nack to this mail before pushing forward to IESG. On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote: > Hi Sean, Tom, Russ, and all, > > Sorry for bringing this up late. Technically past 25 October, and yes I > would like to see this go through as you might expect from an author... > > That said, can someone with good ASN.1-fu please have look at the changes > w.r.t. ASN.1 structure and OIDs? I tried to include all your comments > properly - but I would feel safer if one of you could confirm. > > Thanks > Tim > > > > On 26 Oct 2016, at 05:13, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) < > kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov> wrote: > > > > I read the draft once again. I support publication. > > > > Found a minor typo in the last paragraph on p.15 (can be dealt with > during RFC editor review process): > > s/the loss of on IP address prefix from the VRS-IP/the loss of one IP > address prefix from the VRS-IP/ > > > > Sriram > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: sidr on behalf of Chris Morrow < > morrowc@ops-netman.net> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:08 AM > > To: sidr@ietf.org; sidr-chairs@ietf.org; sidr-ads@ietf.org > > Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - > ends 10/25/2016 > > > > Howdy WG folks! > > The authors of: > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered > > > > believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the > > request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if > > appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. > > > > The abstract for this draft is: > > "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation > > procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational > > fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while > > retaining essential security features." > > > > Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts please, > > this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. > > > > thanks for reading/replying/thinking! > > -chris > > co-chair-persona > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > --94eb2c043d289f0f11053fc65ac0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'll prepare the shepherd doc and await an ack/nack to= this mail before pushing forward to IESG.
=
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Tim Bruijn= zeels <tim@ripe.net> wrote:
Hi = Sean, Tom, Russ, and all,

Sorry for bringing this up late. Technically past 25 October, and yes I wou= ld like to see this go through as you might expect from an author...

That said, can someone with good ASN.1-fu please have look at the changes w= .r.t. ASN.1 structure and OIDs? I tried to include all your comments proper= ly - but I would feel safer if one of you could confirm.

Thanks
Tim


> On 26 Oct 2016, at 05:13, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) <kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov> wro= te:
>
> I read the draft once again. I support publication.
>
> Found a minor typo in the last paragraph on p.15 (can be dealt with du= ring RFC editor review process):
> s/the loss of on IP address prefix from the VRS-IP/the loss of one IP = address prefix from the VRS-IP/
>
> Sriram
>
> ________________________________________
> From: sidr <sidr-bounces@i= etf.org> on behalf of Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:08 AM
> To: sidr@ietf.org; sidr-chairs@ietf.org; sidr-ads@ietf.org
> Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsider= ed - ends=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 10/25/2016
>
> Howdy WG folks!
> The authors of:
>=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered
>
> believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the
> request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if > appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication.
>
> The abstract for this draft is:
>=C2=A0 "This document proposes an update to the certificate valida= tion
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of op= erational
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, w= hile
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0retaining essential security features."
>
> Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts p= lease,
> this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016.
>
> thanks for reading/replying/thinking!
> -chris
> co-chair-persona
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

--94eb2c043d289f0f11053fc65ac0-- From nobody Wed Oct 26 08:35:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 809A6129625; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:35:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 niWXwz2Ee7SS; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:35:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x234.google.com (mail-qk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A8961294C7; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:35:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x234.google.com with SMTP id v138so8950676qka.5; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:35:26 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=Hq7ACGXa6XUWfsu3Quj5W4Sy4auX8bKHxEqCiotQO3Y=; b=z/YAICCkPpYBrpvY20eh9YalqecuuoRzRVKS1JCBTrofUSaaaPWMRZcJ+KPCp73HdW ZoWOld8gEG/e71fc8NX9TN2wBcKyDBiNE9RvAjY1LtDGZsnB/rsMKj5IuzP5GqpjNLRR 9QtfZkySc8xl7av444OdoPZ/muhbyqlzfXBYHOdvTh+fK44rRfPBosSqp0UbmDerC3p7 b4at/LEBAs0/luNVHMQBz1J2swbVXZ3uFQ3sV7ppNvsvkYew004o+QgBeFJYOb87A+rj o9U3wJaj2kcU5BLgjNSvm4v6XqS52vZvZlksaqF2N1J2SzYDUC4pywwWu5HoOOuyyvr9 RVlg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Hq7ACGXa6XUWfsu3Quj5W4Sy4auX8bKHxEqCiotQO3Y=; b=Uk1I2iVBlUyRFKeHjoaT2053j9hRD1aYCnEMP04OypJvsw5J6B6tJAYNQ84MvsMZzO GDmOHSbiQHco5E9tmzVHxfMksTmLbcpX3kfV0QRIM+cvBWLoTd7ZV1NF/AqY5s2OyAb0 ZcTk9cr9eBhp9/+vuORfgo6R3OihzNDpZf9wfUX8YZzDbcIXsAZZZDmx5kKRIBcNUEP7 DRhz0z+IFDT7Ura3H9JdfKcRMot+RQY5n0hfXTiSROpxo0DdbMJXu+IIARwRNoiQ9Vg2 30UcnNIu7QkzMAVDzIqwD1JQF1ae2SjXZVcP8zjFSNQOrnVGT1XfcAbAWcyTE72jCJ0D SOmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcp3Siq/VAqYlfyRJ6tjQ6PpltVI6crS4HYAxccaAJ1YA/zJ2KF4qP5GkwbLTvOP0e1CXwfXrVIzV1vZA== X-Received: by 10.55.129.6 with SMTP id c6mr2576734qkd.4.1477496125199; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:35:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:35:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Morrow Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:35:24 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: C823bDtoUVsI91ywKmHUKA66HtY Message-ID: To: Chris Morrow Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c05cd80b32442053fc65f24 Archived-At: Cc: sidr-ads@ietf.org, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:35:30 -0000 --94eb2c05cd80b32442053fc65f24 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Restarting this thread, with some updates :) Preparing for Seoul in a few weeks time, with the intent that we do not meet face-to-face in Chicago, have all current 'protocol' related docs to the IESG/done and meet instead in sidr-ops if there are agenda items at that time :) Currently we have the following in IESG/pub-request status (13 documents): draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling draft-ietf-sidr-publication draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol (10/26 sent forward) draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered (10/26 sent forward) Currently still active documents (8 documents): draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying draft-ietf-sidr-slurm (this reflects the changes since the last email, included below) I believe we're still planning to move (and have agreement from authors): draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying which leaves to be dealt with by Chicago 2 documents: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation draft-ietf-sidr-slurm I think this is good, I believe (and of course I should be corrected if wrong) slurm - more work inbound and discussion planned in Seoul tree-validation - I thought moved to sidr-ops, but don't have docs to back that up. -chris On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Chris Morrow wrote: > > Howdy SIDR peeps, > (+bonus ops ad) > > Following on the Berlin meeting we were trying to accomplish two > things: > > 1) get all documents related to sidr protocols into wglc and then > publication > > 2) get all documents which are more operationally focused moved > along to an ops group (sidr-ops or something akin to that) > > With that in mind there are 8 documents in the publication queue: > draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol > draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis > > and 11 still in progress. Of the 11 left Sandy and I think they > roughly break down like: > > Documents which should move to the ops group: > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover > draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases > draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light - authors notified/queried > about this > draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying > > documents which should finish out in sidr: > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol > draft-ietf-sidr-publication > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup - pub request in flight > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered > draft-ietf-sidr-slurm - authors recently updated > draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions - wglc imminent > > I think if there's no meaningful discussion on change for these > between now and 9/16/2016 (Sept 16th) we will assume this list is > correct. For documents in the 'move' list, if progress to publication > happens 'good!'. For all documents in the 'stays' list: > 1) we aim to have wglc by Seoul > 2) publication requests started on as many as possible > > We plan to meet in Seoul, but not in Chicago (Mar 2017) where we > expect the ops group to exist and meet. We can progress documents in > SIDR after Seoul, but the WG should close out shortly after the new > year. (or that's the goal). > > Thoughts? > -chris > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > --94eb2c05cd80b32442053fc65f24 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Restarting this thread, with some updates :)

Preparing for Seoul in a few weeks time, with t= he intent that we do not meet face-to-face in Chicago, have all current = 9;protocol' related docs to the IESG/done and meet instead in sidr-ops = if there are agenda items at that time :)

Currently we have the following in = IESG/pub-request status (13 documents):
dra= ft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions
draft-ietf= -sidr-as-migration
draft-ietf-sidr-bgps= ec-algs
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops
<= /div>
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol
draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling
draft-ietf-sidr-publication
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis
draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol (10/26 sent forward)
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-recons= idered (10/26 sent forward)


Currently still active documents (8 documents):
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover
draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases
draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered
draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying
draf= t-ietf-sidr-slurm

(this reflects the changes since the last email, included = below)

I believe we're still planning to move (and have agreement from author= s):
=C2=A0draft-= ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover
=C2=A0draft-ietf-= sidr-lta-use-cases
=C2=A0draft-ietf-sidr-ro= ute-server-rpki-light
=C2=A0draft-ietf-sidr= -rtr-keying

which leaves to be dealt with by Chicago 2 documents:
=
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation
draft-ietf-sidr-slurm

I think this is good, I believ= e (and of course I should be corrected if wrong)
=C2=A0 slurm - more work inbound and discussion planned in Seoul
=C2=A0 tree-validation - I thought moved to sid= r-ops, but don't have docs to back that up.

-chris

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Chris = Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net> wrote:

Howdy SIDR peeps,
(+bonus ops ad)

Following on the Berlin meeting we were trying to accomplish two
things:

=C2=A0 1) get all documents related to sidr protocols into wglc and then =C2=A0 publication

=C2=A0 2) get all documents which are more operationally focused moved
=C2=A0 along to an ops group (sidr-ops or something akin to that)

With that in mind there are 8 documents in the publication queue:
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis

and 11 still in progress. Of the 11 left Sandy and I think they
roughly break down like:

Documents which should move to the ops group:
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light - authors notified/quer= ied about this
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying

documents which should finish out in sidr:
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-publication
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup - pub request in flight
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-slurm - authors recently updated
=C2=A0 draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions - wglc imminent

I think if there's no meaningful discussion on change for these
between now and 9/16/2016 (Sept 16th) we will assume this list is
correct. For documents in the 'move' list, if progress to publicati= on
happens 'good!'. For all documents in the 'stays' list:
=C2=A0 1) we aim to have wglc by Seoul
=C2=A0 2) publication requests started on as many as possible

We plan to meet in Seoul, but not in Chicago (Mar 2017) where we
expect the ops group to exist and meet. We can progress documents in
SIDR after Seoul, but the WG should close out shortly after the new
year. (or that's the goal).

Thoughts?
-chris

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

--94eb2c05cd80b32442053fc65f24-- From nobody Wed Oct 26 20:18:19 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF874129546; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:18:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.332 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.332 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 33Q2-UtgjFod; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:18:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C7CC128DF6; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:18:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bzbCo-0006Ao-OX; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 03:18:14 +0000 Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:18:12 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Christopher Morrow In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Cc: sidr-ads@ietf.org, sidr wg list Subject: Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 03:18:18 -0000 > Currently we have the following in IESG/pub-request status (13 documents): > draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions > draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol > draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling > draft-ietf-sidr-publication > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol (10/26 sent forward) > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered (10/26 sent forward) an interesting view on progress of these documents is visible in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/ad/alvaro.retana/ randy From nobody Wed Oct 26 20:35:11 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 875151294E1; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:35:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 CDBIW_vlS3gl; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x22f.google.com (mail-qt0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D596012944E; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:35:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id p16so6356585qta.0; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:35:08 -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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=dIMngMp+D008UlgPLcRudiFJBHMGYXPldh8TWrDPONQ=; b=RZh//kVrtooqiuPCl0tneC+OghWr+wSaaR/Ooc8AT8bWaLqW/dEZYrktH/HQnV6ePp Ugr0HAr4Bxt8vxsYgweimVuaDC42mXq1jkgavaQZQL/b95GOvGCLs6VeOZNmdZiiqhzL ZlxVysBLq1iv9QGofconuSSb2rCB28cdU5f79wahFQzLlk3jsG/afMkKiWjbH+H8NW57 k4CaEisxtN6030di3aYupydOyrZgMgegrSep+iFMadqqvhQJc8MDe5ZdOQrrAbEJM/Pm eGes6k4tWVLM6YV4Sm9V7tnRJFH4/D7C5FR3XvgIOg07BYRwuamZQmeTt7GvHphB2AjC awdQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=dIMngMp+D008UlgPLcRudiFJBHMGYXPldh8TWrDPONQ=; b=F71If5ZuPlIaFj+B3tqGAd3NkS1qClOcHlnzAPeRTysXeLm+E9soNm8nKN+P9lRkkQ 9CGDDUqggTzYxLBhUu4oi7I6mEkA+v6JZrH8GgXvq1FpnP/2KjPqU/ltDg/Np+LWvsu5 F6RYdQCry8Nb5iPI9A9D5q5E8lMZ3zTo0UGHAzbB6fWMxtFXAV0tL9fgQjKwNgJMr47t /TyVDwB2N5KlBjUNAg+hxly2bcbqCfGZK4RLceYHEvF5359vW1OGPPHrYuKErvXjwKxD 62CVvgkzGgZGeoJUDvgFUgrK9XuK6U7t6LsHRRuM07vi41bdzBkVVe+cZIlJt7k61blW mnjg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcBK+OIka5HawgfSWQGNEcYEpPZ0oWkHu1AnKF7UWT8xZA4cqMrk4BC61UZhFlmEok4eflLmNZ1Xwtc5Q== X-Received: by 10.237.45.38 with SMTP id h35mr4191989qtd.83.1477539307960; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:35:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.105.244 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:35:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Morrow Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 23:35:07 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: XOcPGwM3E5nU-pXx0TMIaD1iZFI Message-ID: To: Randy Bush Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c124a7497d7e5053fd06d70 Archived-At: Cc: sidr-ads@ietf.org, sidr wg list Subject: Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 03:35:10 -0000 --94eb2c124a7497d7e5053fd06d70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > > Currently we have the following in IESG/pub-request status (13 > documents): > > draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions > > draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol > > draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling > > draft-ietf-sidr-publication > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis > > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol (10/26 sent forward) > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered (10/26 sent forward) > > an interesting view on progress of these documents is visible in > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/ad/alvaro.retana/ yes, the chairs posed the question: "Err, did we sink your battleship with too many docks?" to alvaro, he's still using his snorkel to swim out of the trench... he'll get there he says :) (and basically we did our job pushing documents forward and working through the discussions.... 'we' here == 'working-group' not 'me' Thanks to the WG folk for doing some hard work and focusing) -chris --94eb2c124a7497d7e5053fd06d70 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>= wrote:
> Currently w= e have the following in IESG/pub-request status (13 documents):
> draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions
> draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol
> draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling
> draft-ietf-sidr-publication
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis
> draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol (10/26 sent forward)
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered (10/26 sent forward)=

an interesting view on progress of these documents is visible in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/ad/alvaro.re= tana/

yes, the chairs posed the questio= n: "Err, did we sink your battleship with too many docks?" to alv= aro, he's still using his snorkel to swim out of the trench... he'l= l get there =C2=A0he says :)

(and basically we did= our job pushing documents forward and working through the discussions.... = 'we' here =3D=3D 'working-group' not 'me' =C2=A0Tha= nks to the WG folk for doing some hard work and focusing)

-chris=C2=A0
--94eb2c124a7497d7e5053fd06d70-- From nobody Wed Oct 26 20:37:41 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 431811294E1; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:37:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.332 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.332 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 c8yyrjM6suCD; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:37:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FFA212944E; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 20:37:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bzbVZ-0006Dw-VN; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 03:37:38 +0000 Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:37:36 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Christopher Morrow In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Cc: sidr-ads@ietf.org, sidr wg list Subject: Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 03:37:40 -0000 > yes, the chairs posed the question: "Err, did we sink your battleship > with too many docks?" to alvaro, he's still using his snorkel to swim > out of the trench... he'll get there he says :) it would seem desirable to get them through the iesg before closing sidr and transitioning to sidrops. randy From nobody Fri Oct 28 05:54:16 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D8781293F9 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:54:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sn3rd.com 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 m9kzzJjNeY-k for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:54:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x22b.google.com (mail-qt0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77505129A8B for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:54:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id n6so135714qtd.1 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:54:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sn3rd.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=y2/sk4YzXNFDcKhMao+RR6b3l/R1XDbEO1zcrAj8HLo=; b=MiBpVWRI6J8Ft5b193YhFIkByfgCWeWdOBaA0mV2eOOVSGZPzyFWgVKw27LHNpOl4F JTXjvTa1GrkcjK0cujES98EhVrRbcnLIFWpketkGbtriXNvgkwCEEOGFGrFuXGk6HHJG /xe9Hghm8iDj6tj+QgPTQXFXtckSU10aKJ+LY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=y2/sk4YzXNFDcKhMao+RR6b3l/R1XDbEO1zcrAj8HLo=; b=cdMHWsken1AeL9idX9hNG+ID+fZ7aO10FeyDDCxgxut7Ra9a/F/dUniiU9O+9ac7UF RD04/G+Y68wiu7xUGdI1wTo0D6TpDiTDobUlemg6VqT2RPxA2UbTjaw2kXsxm9F6wc97 8nkf00gOP8lPFC66XZ31iLNP625vLSSqkbAZNsVVg3TVq2PPmXH5sgNBaDWwNp3jSk63 eJFff8wz00/78ztLc/gQYbUcdBwm13+9DXMHsHAnxWFjtQFwXhcd4sisdul0HXiqX6/w ITPT2KpHV8E3ku833cHAlO8yBzzfQL3j1GcA96hva4ieF2P2sPZWVm+25qnmqUGpKAVZ 1FJw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvezuhyI7uiHLDtQUhqXZVfK0nCUvXTb0W5x4AjAOUibsXCj42SiSMjBKaqGEjBLpg== X-Received: by 10.237.49.198 with SMTP id 64mr11190572qth.113.1477659251567; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.0.112] ([96.231.230.70]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x2sm6160001qkc.14.2016.10.28.05.54.09 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:54:10 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Sean Turner In-Reply-To: <8E2E93F5-6184-4E58-8EF8-65C5D43E54A2@ripe.net> Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 08:54:09 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <77AED014-31CB-4C2D-BD68-663C62C715C3@sn3rd.com> References: <8E2E93F5-6184-4E58-8EF8-65C5D43E54A2@ripe.net> To: Tim Bruijnzeels X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Cc: "sidr-ads@ietf.org" , Chris Morrow , "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:54:15 -0000 Can do. But I probably won=E2=80=99t get to it until this weekend. spt > On Oct 26, 2016, at 11:32, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote: >=20 > Hi Sean, Tom, Russ, and all, >=20 > Sorry for bringing this up late. Technically past 25 October, and yes = I would like to see this go through as you might expect from an = author... >=20 > That said, can someone with good ASN.1-fu please have look at the = changes w.r.t. ASN.1 structure and OIDs? I tried to include all your = comments properly - but I would feel safer if one of you could confirm. >=20 > Thanks > Tim >=20 >=20 >> On 26 Oct 2016, at 05:13, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) = wrote: >>=20 >> I read the draft once again. I support publication. >>=20 >> Found a minor typo in the last paragraph on p.15 (can be dealt with = during RFC editor review process): >> s/the loss of on IP address prefix from the VRS-IP/the loss of one IP = address prefix from the VRS-IP/ >>=20 >> Sriram >>=20 >> ________________________________________ >> From: sidr on behalf of Chris Morrow = >> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:08 AM >> To: sidr@ietf.org; sidr-chairs@ietf.org; sidr-ads@ietf.org >> Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - = ends 10/25/2016 >>=20 >> Howdy WG folks! >> The authors of: >> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered >>=20 >> believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the >> request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if >> appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. >>=20 >> The abstract for this draft is: >> "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation >> procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational >> fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while >> retaining essential security features." >>=20 >> Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts = please, >> this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. >>=20 >> thanks for reading/replying/thinking! >> -chris >> co-chair-persona >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> sidr mailing list >> sidr@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr >=20 From nobody Mon Oct 31 07:51:56 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietf.org Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BCA4128B37; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 07:51:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.36.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <147792551210.32473.1312033123909603615.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 07:51:52 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: sidr@ietf.org Subject: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation-03.txt X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 14:51:52 -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 of the IETF. Title : RPKI Certificate Tree Validation by the RIPE NCC RPKI Validator Authors : Oleg Muravskiy Tim Bruijnzeels Filename : draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation-03.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2016-10-31 Abstract: This document describes the approach to validate the content of the RPKI certificate tree, as used by the RIPE NCC RPKI Validator. This approach is independent of a particular object retrieval mechanism. This allows it to be used with repositories available over the rsync protocol, the RPKI Repository Delta Protocol, and repositories that use a mix of both. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation-03 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation-03 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 Mon Oct 31 08:16:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E552F12956A; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 08:15:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.397 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 SvT2ssFF50jA; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 08:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mahimahi.ripe.net (mahimahi.ripe.net [IPv6:2001:67c:2e8:11::c100:1372]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 677DC1294D0; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 08:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nene.ripe.net ([193.0.23.10]) by mahimahi.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c1EJW-0003Hk-IB; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:15:55 +0100 Received: from sslvpn.ripe.net ([193.0.20.230] helo=vpn-201.ripe.net) by nene.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c1EJW-0000gv-BS; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:15:54 +0100 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Tim Bruijnzeels In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:15:54 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <09782C8D-35BF-4441-AB4C-6225D5ADC20F@ripe.net> References: To: Christopher Morrow X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-ACL-Warn: Delaying message X-RIPE-Spam-Level: ------------ X-RIPE-Spam-Report: Spam Total Points: -12.1 points pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ -7.5 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -2.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-RIPE-Signature: 784d7acfe6559f2a0b602ec6519a0719ef0570b6e825ce9caeae154070df25d3 Archived-At: Cc: Chris Morrow , sidr-ads@ietf.org, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:16:00 -0000 Hi all, > On 26 Oct 2016, at 17:35, Christopher Morrow = wrote: >=20 > which leaves to be dealt with by Chicago 2 documents: > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation You may have just seen the -03 version posted. This version now includes a scope section to make it clear that: This document describes how the RIPE NCC RPKI Validator version 2.23 has been implemented. Source code to this software can be found here: [github]. The purpose of this document is to provide transparency to users of (and contributors to) this software tool, as well as serve to be subjected to scrutiny by the SIDR Working Group. It is not intended as a document that describes a standard or best practices on how validation should be done in general. The full name of the document "RPKI Certificate Tree Validation by the = RIPE NCC RPKI Validator" was always clear on the scope. And we mentioned = it at various occasions. The short name "RPKI Tree Validation" may be = somewhat confusing - we are open to suggestions btw.. plus, if the IETF = (SIDR-OPS most likely) wants to take on the work of making a general = validation document, we would be happy to contribute to it in separate = document. We really value the feedback that we got from the working on this = document. Although not all feedback is reflected in the current = implementation (and therefore in the main body of the document) - we = have included these discussions in the Security Considerations section. = We believe that none of these issues qualify as showstoppers to the = software described at this time, but we may well address them in future = releases. There was some discussion at the last IETF about how to deal with a = document like this. It describes a moving target. Our implementation is = subject to change after all. We prefer to tackle it by going for last call on this document = describing version 2.23 as soon as is allowed by IETF, in the SIDR WG. = As far as we are concerned this is done. Of course if there is any = remaining unclarity we will address. If and when future releases of our software include significant changes = in the validation algorithm, we plan to document transparently. = Pragmatically speaking we believe that minor things can be documented in = the README of future releases (.. works like RFC-### with these = exceptions). For bigger changes however, or whenever our code stabilises = again, we would probably seek to either update the existing document, or = create a new document. We would prefer to run any such work through = SIDR-OPS once established, but individual submission is also an option. In the end what matters to us most is that we have a clear description = of how the code works, and provide full transparency on considerations. Kind regards Tim & Oleg From nobody Mon Oct 31 12:06:53 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03430129A40 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:06:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sn3rd.com 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 wdZEDEP0_vwJ for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:06:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x230.google.com (mail-qk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFD8A129A3F for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x230.google.com with SMTP id v138so83209811qka.0 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:06:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sn3rd.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=aPPb0N93sFnC7kzcNRftV5megR9UVE1JQhKdW192e5c=; b=mOmMXOWTPFXMe0T2jFtZ6BfnQPZdxLFeRiF8zvyov5JjO4MJ64IZO+k+324xq81eXK 26I3PWQtYJBWfUkY1epX7NZXRKSyeIoXN880vi1eAGc4HbhSg5LvI22bRCN1+x5LyKIg n48jSYtDZ/3hCFTrNCL+35xcnBE68M4TTdTiY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=aPPb0N93sFnC7kzcNRftV5megR9UVE1JQhKdW192e5c=; b=FvlRB/vrIGqSA1jhehXue8wHE9NwQzuwDCbvb2/8MpcxVXz7T0yaE92r9pWq52COYm ElgGI5BTQ2iZq3aE4VWsG9nGfmdxKB3MEH2xhY8ErBnagO3kqxrJl6xuvhBXQx086JWF d10vglx9LUpiam7S/cfgNVi9kUCNIRXIRv29WtPmbIpOjq1ZOQa7BxQNiICyQslExrjn qXUfES8PPNxEXNLFa/NzPhp4m7g6QNpnPjDQ5d/lbG2i/B+U/N/ynr6LN12wGDu4j7+s SP2B/2JxI8Cjrf9cRnFKvfxRS/BsnvRlm2cBeY8LiACBIp8dYcAwwCZ57peG8r19WdMm xhrw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngve1lEKExswjEFsgGpluXgCH2/UOtY5nMkoMN4rIZongfJ4wL50BG3BPaUNrJ3DvDQ== X-Received: by 10.55.197.72 with SMTP id p69mr25040513qki.241.1477940806469; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.0.92] ([96.231.230.70]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n128sm13884057qka.49.2016.10.31.12.06.45 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 31 Oct 2016 12:06:45 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Sean Turner In-Reply-To: <8E2E93F5-6184-4E58-8EF8-65C5D43E54A2@ripe.net> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:06:43 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <8E2E93F5-6184-4E58-8EF8-65C5D43E54A2@ripe.net> To: Tim Bruijnzeels X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Cc: "sidr-ads@ietf.org" , Chris Morrow , "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" , "sidr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - ends 10/25/2016 X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:06:51 -0000 I didn=E2=80=99t compile it, but it looks right to me. And for what = it=E2=80=99s worth, you did exactly what I would have done by copying = the syntax into the mainbody in order to explain it, but imposing it = directly from 3779/6268 in the module. spt > On Oct 26, 2016, at 11:32, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote: >=20 > Hi Sean, Tom, Russ, and all, >=20 > Sorry for bringing this up late. Technically past 25 October, and yes = I would like to see this go through as you might expect from an = author... >=20 > That said, can someone with good ASN.1-fu please have look at the = changes w.r.t. ASN.1 structure and OIDs? I tried to include all your = comments properly - but I would feel safer if one of you could confirm. >=20 > Thanks > Tim >=20 >=20 >> On 26 Oct 2016, at 05:13, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) = wrote: >>=20 >> I read the draft once again. I support publication. >>=20 >> Found a minor typo in the last paragraph on p.15 (can be dealt with = during RFC editor review process): >> s/the loss of on IP address prefix from the VRS-IP/the loss of one IP = address prefix from the VRS-IP/ >>=20 >> Sriram >>=20 >> ________________________________________ >> From: sidr on behalf of Chris Morrow = >> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:08 AM >> To: sidr@ietf.org; sidr-chairs@ietf.org; sidr-ads@ietf.org >> Subject: [sidr] WGLC - draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered - = ends 10/25/2016 >>=20 >> Howdy WG folks! >> The authors of: >> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered >>=20 >> believe they have addressed all inflight concerns/comments, the >> request is to WGLC this, consider it's place in the world and if >> appropriate pass this document along to the IESG for publication. >>=20 >> The abstract for this draft is: >> "This document proposes an update to the certificate validation >> procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational >> fragility in the management of certificates in the RPKI, while >> retaining essential security features." >>=20 >> Let's have a read through, consider and reply with your thoughts = please, >> this WGLC is set to expire: 10/25/2016 - October 25, 2016. >>=20 >> thanks for reading/replying/thinking! >> -chris >> co-chair-persona >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> sidr mailing list >> sidr@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr >=20