From nobody Tue Apr 6 23:30:07 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE1E3A41F1; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 23:30:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Gg43CandniGQ; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 23:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out20-3.mail.aliyun.com (out20-3.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.20.3]) (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 461B23A41FB; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 23:29:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=CONTINUE; BC=0.4315877|-1; CH=green; DM=|CONTINUE|false|; DS=CONTINUE|ham_regular_dialog|0.0398022-0.00133716-0.958861; FP=0|0|0|0|0|-1|-1|-1; HT=ay29a033018047212; MF=madi@rpstir.net; NM=1; PH=DU; RN=5; RT=5; SR=0; TI=SMTPD_---.JwC9PKT_1617776986; Received: from 172.20.10.2(mailfrom:madi@rpstir.net fp:SMTPD_---.JwC9PKT_1617776986) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(10.147.42.241); Wed, 07 Apr 2021 14:29:53 +0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.60.0.2.21\)) From: Di Ma In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2021 14:29:43 +0800 Cc: Chris Morrow , SIDROps Chairs , SIDR Operations WG , sidrops-ads@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <70D35AC9-4E52-4128-ADCA-89FDC93952DA@rpstir.net> References: <87lfa94xyj.wl-morrowc@ops-netman.net> To: George Michaelson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.60.0.2.21) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] [WG ADOPTION] draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations - 04/16/2021 X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2021 06:30:06 -0000 +1=20 I support adoption and I agree with George=E2=80=99s point of view. Di >=20 > So, I support Adoption and I think there are things to be done here. I > can't suggest words yet because I still think I need to understand. >=20 > cheers >=20 > -George >=20 > On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 3:38 AM Chris Morrow = wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> Howdy WG Folken, >> The authors of: >> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations= >>=20 >> had asked a while ago (probably 5 revisions ago :( ) for WG Adoption >> of their draft. The draft abstract is: >>=20 >> "The address space holder needs to issue an ROA object when it >> authorizes one or more ASes to originate routes to multiple = prefixes. >> During the process of ROA issuance, the address space holder needs = to >> specify an origin AS for a list of IP prefixes. Besides, the = address >> space holder has a free choice to put multiple prefixes into a = single >> ROA or issue separate ROAs for each prefix based on the current >> specification. This memo analyzes and presents some operational >> problems which may be caused by the misconfigurations of ROAs >> containing multiple IP prefixes. Some suggestions and = considerations >> also have been proposed." >>=20 >> a) Please consider this a WG Call for Adoption of this draft. >>=20 >> 2) Please take a few moments to read the ~5 page draft and send along = comments/ >> questions/complaints(in the form of fixed text) to the authors. >>=20 >> iii) this call expires 04/16/2021 - April 16 2021 >>=20 >> Thanks! >> -chris >> wg-chair-persona >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Sidrops mailing list >> Sidrops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Sidrops mailing list > Sidrops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops From nobody Fri Apr 16 10:41:07 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E773A2DCD; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 10:41:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.ad.jp header.b=kU+Pbcvg; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.ad.jp header.b=A0aN9ssz 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 bt6EDPOZS4jm; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 10:40:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dist8.nic.ad.jp (dist8.nic.ad.jp [IPv6:2001:dc2:1000:2004::8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 377103A2DCC; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 10:40:57 -0700 (PDT) To: Chris Morrow DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nic.ad.jp; s=nic; t=1618594854; bh=gy1zcc0v7gHkAalN0AuhWE9UWG24XCGz83ZWdEsOFdQ=; h=To:Cc:References:From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To; b=kU+PbcvgTMcVinKgSgAiIOR6TGEcVOptPZgppHdlxnlrhwJvzDNF74pZ7Rkxq2Spk LxoVc0RIYZO/zx8yzP/rt/KJdZGdDnulWAteFxOdcu8tQNohvF/Po8Ai2RxJhS5gXI mz79JwZHFEBZBqY34vM2c5/mP30ff9lOza+BVmwI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nic.ad.jp; s=nic; t=1618594853; bh=gy1zcc0v7gHkAalN0AuhWE9UWG24XCGz83ZWdEsOFdQ=; h=To:Cc:References:From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To; b=A0aN9ssz65GFpV5lT6dLS4I5ZAyvceGHdR/uaS5Rqijx9xHVYMI356ssQ2OGjqQ8K +yHOra53Voiy4TpkmNLEjVdNksYTQWY6lHbf5r7597Jb6fg1UiCKBSseAB+g34gsjs YXPrG8PvH0OjfPxL0rdkpSZkvZBSBQxszkba++gU= Cc: SIDROps Chairs , sidrops@ietf.org, sidrops-ads@ietf.org, Tim Bruijnzeels References: <87lfa94xyj.wl-morrowc@ops-netman.net> <67F48899-3B77-4722-B467-F73D50DF1006@nlnetlabs.nl> From: Taiji Kimura Message-ID: <3d723c7a-6e36-7333-560b-799e51d528e5@nic.ad.jp> Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 02:40:51 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <67F48899-3B77-4722-B467-F73D50DF1006@nlnetlabs.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] [WG ADOPTION] draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations - 04/16/2021 X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 17:41:06 -0000 Hi, Tim's points sound to me. I support adoption to discuss further on avoiding complexity on processing ROA. -- kimura taiji On 2021/03/29 23:06, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote: > Hi, > > I am not sure yet whether this should be a separate RFC in the end, or that this should be considered with other BCP work. But I support adoption so this can be discussed more thoroughly. > > I have a number of comments / requests for clarity, most importantly: > > = revocation? > > A large number of experiments for the process of ROA issuance have > been made on our RPKI testbed, it is found that the misconfigurations > during the issuance may cause the ROAs which have been issued to be > revoked. > > I don't see how the ROAs would be revoked in this context. I think the problem is that ROAs which contain multiple prefixes can become invalid if one of the prefixes is lost by the issuing CA and the ROA is seen to 'over-claim'. > > I.e. the problem that I see is fate-sharing. This has been discussed in the past and the advice - in general - was to issue ROAs on a per prefix basis if possible. Unless of course, as the authors also say, this would result in 100s of ROAs. There is a tradeoff to be considered. > > > = analysis > > It looks like an analysis was included in version -02 but has since been removed. > > For the analysis I would like to raise that multi-prefix ROAs are not always a problem. The issue (that I see) arises when a parent shrinks a CA certificate before the child CA realizes this. This is an issue for remote children using RFC 6492 - they may find that the parent has already shrunk their certificate. > > However, for hosted CAs where the parent and children live in the same system it is achievable to make sure that child CAs re-issue ROAs in advance of the parent re-issuing their CA certificate. So, the problem may never come up there. Meaning that just the occurrence of multi-prefix ROAs in such system is not necessarily an issue. > > = redundant transmission? > > From the document: > > That is to say, the update of the ROA containing multiple > IP address prefixes will lead to redundant transmission between RP > and BGP routers > > I am not sure what the authors mean here. The RTR protocol is based on validated ROA prefixes (VRPs) (section 5.6/5.7 of RFC 8210). If there are ROA objects with many prefixes, then replacing those ROAs does not necessarily result in a lot of churn to the routers. Meaning if a ROA is replaced then only the difference in VRPs is sent to the router. > > > Kind regards, > Tim > > > > >> On 26 Mar 2021, at 18:38, Chris Morrow wrote: >> >> >> Howdy WG Folken, >> The authors of: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations >> >> had asked a while ago (probably 5 revisions ago :( ) for WG Adoption >> of their draft. The draft abstract is: >> >> "The address space holder needs to issue an ROA object when it >> authorizes one or more ASes to originate routes to multiple prefixes. >> During the process of ROA issuance, the address space holder needs to >> specify an origin AS for a list of IP prefixes. Besides, the address >> space holder has a free choice to put multiple prefixes into a single >> ROA or issue separate ROAs for each prefix based on the current >> specification. This memo analyzes and presents some operational >> problems which may be caused by the misconfigurations of ROAs >> containing multiple IP prefixes. Some suggestions and considerations >> also have been proposed." >> >> a) Please consider this a WG Call for Adoption of this draft. >> >> 2) Please take a few moments to read the ~5 page draft and send along comments/ >> questions/complaints(in the form of fixed text) to the authors. >> >> iii) this call expires 04/16/2021 - April 16 2021 >> >> Thanks! >> -chris >> wg-chair-persona >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sidrops mailing list >> Sidrops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops > > _______________________________________________ > Sidrops mailing list > Sidrops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops > From nobody Wed Apr 21 08:09:37 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A05A33A2827 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 18:53:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.888 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ums-edu-my.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 bDwnURVHkWjI for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 18:53:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x236.google.com (mail-lj1-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 2957C3A2822 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 18:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x236.google.com with SMTP id l22so6044602ljc.9 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 18:53:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ums-edu-my.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=vwkrszyfFLPRGD77uTQkZLaWtJOpGNf87CMZMXl7iQ0=; b=ap5EgDXclqcJkM1CV6wu5732iH1Yz4CXEf3lQcu17qv7IU1PPnvD6nYUsvDzmjXfmb hUaH1c2g+HQYt3Gq9PJUkmF60EVxSS8vPmmZ9TxTIrsUw+aofBcoRYiTkPmWT8sEneBI VyyGQhHLa5lUsN8TGqRgUehaPRMc03oYqg2ExxKB6DXOfnYcYqDKCJWCu5SbKpdX+pi8 IO4x3oASYGfA+cfaKG3GB/+ibB3Aetr3SNnqxStfaf5zRQeP2quR9tgh+kv9qtoblQvl O8uPQwFEyFGZoo/ZO9F11lZSPL7bj1uxgwBiJRTbrHbySiP1s5wrqhUBAYRQu4B75tb0 rmiA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=vwkrszyfFLPRGD77uTQkZLaWtJOpGNf87CMZMXl7iQ0=; b=RjGsRBQ266cBgemDV2BxZ405OSSa9vmWkgOOhdCGXguKvcEuY+NRfvaG7b18hsi2R8 QDeanJ3mqwFAVeasOeR+WUkbOellfqNbDFdi6Hg30PT+cMXgoetHtbYXuCmQB0REwdrM PubbRsLggQDOO5DZQerl68X6cJmuxsIuPRTarQEoJJNTvA0wEP/XVd2b7Rxd7mwAN1DU gLisW4tR8FVBgtnRHPfj2g2MYOTs9Dn83api7WKsRIqy+Venyoi3c/kHbXrbgwGBlNfb RXG/W/g4SU+JAV8UBlOkt5NS+gUgaswmxp3iET5yKiG6X/XdBV8yVe01L24WBJhb5pab tOqg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533DXbkG7Ci4ZWltj+HCUqqRUqiH5lsJgs/XaxPIwAB/Bi3PrfqQ S2Txs6WrahkQn/mw0WvlO3TIqIzYIm/RUHNlBUrRo0etcx9tmof0gWqKU3vWlGcFGG3wCr7Bc5U HgS8Y8sdiSWIjE7KLPItIiR+YGA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy+Yim4eKvdZ9kJJh/dgveE3vXik0nDSkyZCOWnPnu4Dqa49irUeDaC6IrgK+yHDCiEE8vcGAVoGio763UINP0= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9785:: with SMTP id y5mr2509060lji.56.1618192419079; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 18:53:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: LEAU YU BENG - Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:53:28 +0800 Message-ID: To: sidrops@ietf.org, morrowc@ops-netman.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000515d7d05bfbcc8fd" Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:09:35 -0700 Subject: Re: [Sidrops] [WG ADOPTION] draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations - 04/16/2021 X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 01:53:49 -0000 --000000000000515d7d05bfbcc8fd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" The problem is interesting from both research and engineering aspects. +1 support adoption. Thanks a lot. Ts. Dr. Leau Yu Beng Senior Lecturer / Head of Network Engineering Program 088-320000 ext:101242 016-6552072 lybeng@ums.edu.my Faculty of Computing and Informatics Universiti Malaysia Sabah Jalan UMS 88400, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. fki.ums.edu.my Please consider your environmental responsibility. Before printing this e-mail message, ask yourself whether you really need a hard copy. CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION: This email message and any attachment may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which the email is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, that person is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us as soon as possible by telephone (collect calls will be accepted). Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. -- DISCLAIMER: The information in this e-mail and any attachment(s) transmitted with it ("Message") is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. UMS is not responsible for any unauthorized change made to the information or for the effect of such changes. You are hereby notified that any action in reliance upon, or any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, printing or copying of this Message or any part thereof by anyone other than intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. Any opinion, conclusion, and other information in this Message that do not relate to the official business of UMS shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by UMS. UMS shall not be liable for loss damage caused by viruses transmitted by this Message. --000000000000515d7d05bfbcc8fd Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The problem is interesting from both research and engineer= ing aspects.

+1 support adoption.

Thanks a lot.

=
Ts. Dr. Leau Yu Beng
Senior Lecturer / Head of Network Engineering Program
Faculty of C= omputing and Informatics Universiti Malaysia Sabah Jalan UMS 88400, Kota Ki= nabalu, Sabah, Malaysia.=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0
Please consider your environmental responsibility. Before printi= ng this e-mail message, ask yourself whether you really need a hard copy.
=
CONFIDENTI= AL COMMUNICATION: This email message and any attachment may contain privile= ged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individua= l or entity to which the email is addressed. If the reader of this message = is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliv= er it to the intended recipient, that person is hereby notified that any di= ssemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. I= f you have received this communication in error, please notify us as soon a= s possible by telephone (collect calls will be accepted). Thank you for you= r cooperation and assistance.
<= /div>

DISCLAIMER: The information in this e-mail and any attachment(s) transmitte= d with it ("Message") is intended only for the use of the intende= d recipient(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. UMS = is not responsible for any unauthorized change made to the information or f= or the effect of such changes. You are hereby notified that any action in r= eliance upon, or any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, p= rinting or copying of this Message or any part thereof by anyone other than= intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. Any opinion, conclusion, and= other information in this Message that do not relate to the official busin= ess of UMS shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by UMS. UMS sh= all not be liable for loss damage caused by viruses transmitted by this Mes= sage. --000000000000515d7d05bfbcc8fd-- From nobody Thu Apr 22 02:56:01 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietf.org Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26F8E3A0AFE; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 02:55:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Lars Eggert via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-sidrops-lta-use-cases@ietf.org, sidrops-chairs@ietf.org, sidrops@ietf.org, Chris Morrow , morrowc@ops-netman.net X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.28.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Lars Eggert Message-ID: <161908535866.6872.11531416815524537637@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 02:55:59 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Sidrops] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-sidrops-lta-use-cases-06: (with DISCUSS) X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:55:59 -0000 Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-sidrops-lta-use-cases-06: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidrops-lta-use-cases/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Taking over Alissa's DICSUSS, as a reminder to check this when a new revision becomes available: > I do not believe we should publish this document with the term "socially > acceptable data," because it endorses others' determinations of what is > socially acceptable in a blanket fashion. I would recommend "other resources." > > Comment (2019-05-01) I support the DISCUSS ballots of Roman and Mirja and > Benjamin's first three DISCUSS points. From nobody Thu Apr 22 10:19:27 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B32D3A0CEB; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:19:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 PTN20SZ6VxBw; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk1-x736.google.com (mail-qk1-x736.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::736]) (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 044DB3A0CE9; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:19:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x736.google.com with SMTP id q136so26101472qka.7; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:19:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Q9hBzNw3Zg2vMlcnXijpCtMmRAhuuNz9O7ldSOz92OU=; b=NE+8qQoI3rj844If0RrP3Ba94WoUjCMcdlOPuSBpvfNgnAugy8vzpEVhXBrPXc3Rud 4LFiRLNCintdXlICB30mOUOLHFH4AIci1ma6dtvKcRaN7CyVzaAfTH5muVSgOJZGDtct h6/rS0IeBSdaAcCHJv6zYCrcFPIQDLKOalJGl96f47rpi1+G/UKp9ibF9DcWd14XsbnA WC7HVPEr1/k/5TYPyug2YiLQtKYAFrpxwz5rEtvIoMYuQSqBZDFVq8oe37dWgglJR1KT hueE65plj9ksGClO9BEqFdQrK7QGDdDBVbrzid1CUbbpbfuA4ZliqSTVLKq0XOTjHI9L uTnQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Q9hBzNw3Zg2vMlcnXijpCtMmRAhuuNz9O7ldSOz92OU=; b=NS6cv223CwLz6AtiBfha8OLaqoJXY2kioG6qiB6aa0Z3fZa+CUlMNn/DZyKgLeHl16 1ipqQaWlys2Bcf0GFPnLebR1P/N3t6NG3wrOJc5zaQHR0bNl7yARaNNrle+IyVa0HXQ5 LY1h117xXreKXx7DBjoAGQw9IBRyiOiWXygrA/5jPHPgkG6mfzePz5+bxLMORSRdEmMA SnYn+bbM1WQ4ooiPDAsBf4sIWjr+CjDsWjPqq3lz0Ez9rkEIGy1R8/DmMQ5YDaCmrG6C 6TWV8zIF6xeAlA+evlrVCmLClgl44Tk8iA5b46S89pFxWzGB6mcYSL1hXkB83N0FBOaU KNDQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Co4SdDKsTqXyGi8/L5CYUtUO+rSPJdmS8raZc/hsQxwu5KuP4 khvZgG7oQijM+4NGD2JXZmpD3jKpjVlBzMVwjkA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzurux+RXEF+SUy1VCf5VClbaXLmtE6UuioVOV6WFc2ftNH/C7Gk780AY7NgmxtOS20XK2FLjm2ulQDMYLI0bM= X-Received: by 2002:a37:8084:: with SMTP id b126mr4662634qkd.175.1619111957777; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:19:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87lfa94xyj.wl-morrowc@ops-netman.net> In-Reply-To: <87lfa94xyj.wl-morrowc@ops-netman.net> From: Christopher Morrow Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 13:19:06 -0400 Message-ID: To: Chris Morrow Cc: SIDROps Chairs , SIDR Operations WG , sidrops-ads@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000018511305c092e192" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] [WG ADOPTION] draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations - 04/16/2021 X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 17:19:25 -0000 --00000000000018511305c092e192 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Howdy! it's 5 days past the yard-arm.. and it seems like enough folk are curious/interested that we should adopt this. Will the authors please submit a renamed draft to the mill? thanks! -chris co-working-group-chair-persona On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 1:38 PM Chris Morrow wrote: > > Howdy WG Folken, > The authors of: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations > > had asked a while ago (probably 5 revisions ago :( ) for WG Adoption > of their draft. The draft abstract is: > > "The address space holder needs to issue an ROA object when it > authorizes one or more ASes to originate routes to multiple prefixes. > During the process of ROA issuance, the address space holder needs to > specify an origin AS for a list of IP prefixes. Besides, the address > space holder has a free choice to put multiple prefixes into a single > ROA or issue separate ROAs for each prefix based on the current > specification. This memo analyzes and presents some operational > problems which may be caused by the misconfigurations of ROAs > containing multiple IP prefixes. Some suggestions and considerations > also have been proposed." > > a) Please consider this a WG Call for Adoption of this draft. > > 2) Please take a few moments to read the ~5 page draft and send along > comments/ > questions/complaints(in the form of fixed text) to the authors. > > iii) this call expires 04/16/2021 - April 16 2021 > > Thanks! > -chris > wg-chair-persona > > _______________________________________________ > Sidrops mailing list > Sidrops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops > --00000000000018511305c092e192 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Howdy!
it's 5 days past the yard-arm.. and it seem= s like enough folk are curious/interested that
we should adopt th= is.

Will the authors please submit a renamed draft to the mill?

thanks!
-chris
co-working-group-chair-per= sona

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 1:38 PM Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net> wrote:

Howdy WG Folken,
The authors of:
=C2=A0 https://datatracker= .ietf.org/doc/html/draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations

had asked a while ago (probably 5 revisions ago :( ) for WG Adoption
of their draft. The draft abstract is:

=C2=A0 "The address space holder needs to issue an ROA object when it<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0authorizes one or more ASes to originate routes to multiple pr= efixes.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0During the process of ROA issuance, the address space holder n= eeds to
=C2=A0 =C2=A0specify an origin AS for a list of IP prefixes.=C2=A0 Besides,= the address
=C2=A0 =C2=A0space holder has a free choice to put multiple prefixes into a= single
=C2=A0 =C2=A0ROA or issue separate ROAs for each prefix based on the curren= t
=C2=A0 =C2=A0specification.=C2=A0 This memo analyzes and presents some oper= ational
=C2=A0 =C2=A0problems which may be caused by the misconfigurations of ROAs<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0containing multiple IP prefixes.=C2=A0 Some suggestions and co= nsiderations
=C2=A0 =C2=A0also have been proposed."

a) Please consider this a WG Call for Adoption of this draft.

2) Please take a few moments to read the ~5 page draft and send along comme= nts/
questions/complaints(in the form of fixed text) to the authors.

iii) this call expires 04/16/2021 - April 16 2021

Thanks!
-chris
wg-chair-persona

_______________________________________________
Sidrops mailing list
Sidrops@ietf.org<= br> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops
--00000000000018511305c092e192-- From nobody Thu Apr 22 10:46:38 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 117F53A100A for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 66y0xzQbcgLU for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk1-x72f.google.com (mail-qk1-x72f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (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 697263A1007 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72f.google.com with SMTP id v7so19088195qkj.13 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gao6ApF9XtPU5BY1ZQr4l9eHBQPWvhcmSymWOlX/zsI=; b=Vks8fqIDpgCYCQY7yBQWodPPpXiEC8H/N8Z7WPQRiJckwbsAvRVd0X+nTVaEXzZBPD 03oP5mo3fj3apoSGaRS4aqeQPqk2VM0gzkHkKk5Dq7LPiJ2OE6m5GGEDzShth5J5UiHE rY3YUJqXCdg4evyT6/PJf5Z/BpQcrVerCFWZDmK2eDoSHmiSKZPC7MVMc/lCwf+Mj/UJ p4uFNHG9knjrVb45GhcVcfUBKySRKFvNNFzujow1qL8dmOOQI6zgHKmQeA9RQad/T3lu gnTFQ4fzBkuAirV0lVxg2jdZGb2sGnfePz7fJWQc11OoUGTpYyW6Wm1k2D2z1SbLd3Zg wM7Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gao6ApF9XtPU5BY1ZQr4l9eHBQPWvhcmSymWOlX/zsI=; b=V1FL9quQINGPhnwhy3MBzHCIXZNdOT/QA7EM+EblILMxzXQsRyUjI5sXYi3PLLQZBq olESbHjugnB6hC8cdyt/5NH7CWADalUgrEcl8JnusFkKaHOKnkcxfG2SUacYLet7rJoX GKao3JWFH8Y04vy94Yzz4o+U85Ja1As5RyLTOyrM/xXtu10aarb/saPkVC101MUeg1Z+ hzgwWYZV0gotSWwcBTecmNzuO6lrXbbyB7lft300pqWLR7wsObX2geTIEbsOtBNlMatg Y7dy/d5MjFXfZg0vDaHHJC3M7HXbWSkeLyvMwBR9NGjZj94PMNCsTu4wGOqQnbpl/ejR GZXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532/gF8vmz/WA8jSdsJzSU56yrqap09fxKEeZ+WvI+pTTgTIQu5y 4HaR6Vdcd3ebZ+/vYUsC6K5559q72Nzp7uQ2YCsEwwRvgs0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyQu5+axB976jVQfZgoDZukPtHSn4NDnzGQI+uy0hElFHwlF3QGLiGGtl0PmNillzpy30Cx1HJ8PwZPaF1/+rQ= X-Received: by 2002:a37:a78d:: with SMTP id q135mr4810748qke.210.1619113588322; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Christopher Morrow Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 13:46:17 -0400 Message-ID: To: Randy Bush Cc: Job Snijders , SIDR Operations WG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000048747305c09342d1" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 17:46:37 -0000 --00000000000048747305c09342d1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Not a lot of follow on this... (well, public follow up) So, I propose this course of action: 1) this document serves as a 'requirement (and possible solution)' that sidrops used to identify a problem 2) send this along as a query/question to the protocol group (IDR) with a request to: a) say: "go forth, this change seems ok, it's small and such" b) say: "Good googley-moogley! what are you crazypants people on about?? of COURSE this needs to be reviewed... please have AD-foobar spin up SIDR to properly handle this!! TUT-TUT! How cloud you conceive of a world other than this!!" and answer back in 2wks time, one fort-night! and two farthings! (or something, farthings are metric) provided no one screams at me about this WHILE I WRITE THE NEXT EMAIL.. we can send an adoption call/etc in 2wks time OR jump back into our SIDR pantsuit and get to the business of business. -chris On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 6:45 PM Christopher Morrow < christopher.morrow@gmail.com> wrote: > it seems to me this could be framed as: > "Hey, this problem with the protocol is a problem, it's raising problems > for operations > of the systems involved. Let's get the size/shape of the problem > figured out and get > some requirements for a change together to have the SIDR WG fix this > protocol problem" > > that might be hard with SIDR gone, but there are a bunch of ex-SIDR now > SIDROPS folks in > SIDROPS who can say: > "ok, this seems insane, run fast in the opposite direction!!" > or: > "Err, this isn't horrible, maybe this is easy to just fix in a proposal > here?" > > -chris > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 1:12 PM Randy Bush wrote: > >> >>> I'd like to request the chairs to consider initiating a call for >> >>> working group adoption of >> draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update >> >> >> >> this is a protocol change and a serious one, and hence does not belong >> >> in an ops group >> > >> > There is ongoing operational problem >> >> most protocol problems cause operational problems. it is a measure of >> their severity. >> >> randy >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sidrops mailing list >> Sidrops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops >> > --00000000000048747305c09342d1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Not a lot of follow on this... (well, pub= lic follow up)

So, I propose this course of action:
=C2=A0= 1) this document=C2=A0serves as a 'requirement (and possible solution)= ' that sidrops used to identify a problem
=C2=A0 2) send this= along as a query/question to the protocol=C2=A0group (IDR) with a request = to:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0a) say: "go forth, this change seems ok, it= 's small and such"
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0b) say: "Goo= d googley-moogley! what are you crazypants people on about?? of COURSE this= needs to be reviewed... please have AD-foobar spin up SIDR to properly han= dle this!! TUT-TUT! How cloud you conceive of a world other than this!!&quo= t;
=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and answer = back in 2wks time, one fort-night! and two farthings! (or something, farthi= ngs are metric)

provided no one screams at me abou= t this WHILE I WRITE THE NEXT EMAIL.. we can send an adoption call/etc in 2= wks time OR jump back into our SIDR pantsuit and get to the business of bus= iness.

-chris

=
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 6:45 PM Chris= topher Morrow <christoph= er.morrow@gmail.com> wrote:
it seems to me this could be framed as:=
=C2=A0 "Hey, this problem with the protocol is a problem, it'= s raising problems for operations
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 of the systems in= volved. Let's get the size/shape of the problem figured out and get
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 some requirements for a change together to have the SI= DR WG fix this protocol problem"

that might b= e hard with SIDR gone, but there are a bunch of ex-SIDR now SIDROPS folks i= n
SIDROPS who can say:
=C2=A0 "ok, this seems insa= ne, run fast in the opposite direction!!"
or:
=C2=A0 &quo= t;Err, this isn't horrible, maybe this is easy to just fix in a proposa= l here?"

-chris

On Wed, M= ar 10, 2021 at 1:12 PM Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>>> I'd like to request the chairs = to consider initiating a call for
>>> working group adoption of draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validat= ion-update
>>
>> this is a protocol change and a serious one, and hence does not be= long
>> in an ops group
>
> There is ongoing operational problem

most protocol problems cause operational problems.=C2=A0 it is a measure of=
their severity.

randy

_______________________________________________
Sidrops mailing list
Sidrops@ietf.org<= br> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops
--00000000000048747305c09342d1-- From nobody Thu Apr 22 10:54:50 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C31D3A10B0 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:54:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 8s6PMKGWcUb9 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:54:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBFD73A10AA for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:54:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-To: sidrops@ietf.org Received: from crumpet.local (admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 13MHsa4k096960 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:54:37 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8] claimed to be crumpet.local To: Christopher Morrow Cc: Randy Bush , SIDR Operations WG , Job Snijders References: From: Nick Hilliard Message-ID: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:54:35 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.47 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 17:54:48 -0000 Christopher Morrow wrote on 22/04/2021 18:46: > Not a lot of follow on this... (well, public follow up) > > So, I propose this course of action: >   1) this document serves as a 'requirement (and possible solution)' > that sidrops used to identify a problem >   2) send this along as a query/question to the protocol group (IDR) > with a request to: >      a) say: "go forth, this change seems ok, it's small and such" >      b) say: "Good googley-moogley! what are you crazypants people on > about?? of COURSE this needs to be reviewed... please have AD-foobar > spin up SIDR to properly handle this!! TUT-TUT! How cloud you conceive > of a world other than this!!" >       and answer back in 2wks time, one fort-night! and two farthings! > (or something, farthings are metric) do we need to involve IDR? Hard to tell really. Will they get upset if they aren't consulted? (+ will they get ideas if they are?) > provided no one screams at me about this WHILE I WRITE THE NEXT EMAIL.. > we can send an adoption call/etc in 2wks time OR jump back into our SIDR > pantsuit and get to the business of business. sounds good. The proposal doesn't seem to be horrible, several software stacks have implemented it _and_ the rpki hasn't fallen over yet, so it seems like so far, it's not a regression and it seems to fix something, so ... yay? Nick From nobody Thu Apr 22 11:00:21 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C44663A1133 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:00:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.096 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 8lKmzRXpcHH0 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt1-x835.google.com (mail-qt1-x835.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::835]) (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 2E4C63A1130 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x835.google.com with SMTP id s4so6691558qtw.3 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:00:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=r2Z3l5Z4qYh1S68YFn7i2ajR1hw0rOOjAcF5v/STtk4=; b=ig4J8/sFCUldvO6rq+poMokTkf/VgPnE3GM/PtGJlKpTdgMOMDVwcnKBXB5/ZNLzwM C6jbfCNKlfq9hak6TY34yEKmS2jypoiXVawPMmwztMxsa90CzCLB+2z6syZ9b+utuLMC cU37m8U04elDsnoA+GD+cOxyVUcrqA6Z6mMuHLJWvKS5WGV6J7j7V8AiQd28cBuGallV ycT5odj1TdSEHxW4JkO/qRbqepvTEFawx12VFQEb89TH/ziW6IOKHAAr80nVZywexU2D Ew6DNZNbT7Tr74UJ0HF4rwaZkOiDDKvRFZVxuA0RiKkDb+OQ3I8FbHQPGeOFcYNZBYWV YAHw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=r2Z3l5Z4qYh1S68YFn7i2ajR1hw0rOOjAcF5v/STtk4=; b=Bd/3UtOM5mFeVmg67aWXL12xtnXSIV6J9Qsixzp9hu5u38LO703fhXMGGB8wXwTUs5 moSEig6vWAPs6tkd4hL6fYcrsjjoMEU+rx4I+BUVKFJr+mBSKD64UJGXexJQmHTVlibJ PJ/Kfru767pVgRo7lX8UtmF04UblhvkFFEUJNpfzOrg39MQ+Ubng7Vf+9PJQ+UcuLRsh FcYX/sObf5Vz5D01BY+h4FmtPlZ+S0/Oak1YVYWKaIsBM29sP3kQ9n1KxVuPk8wZcK/m t+XpesGEzbhexDWxOU+1mLWp0bTb9cG3tr8rxgRrKXbCMAnUF2ljoE/qCUK0HnGuJrlC 0C/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530klbDwZF6glLCIq9xLDleyQe88Fuy0eVkqAJkF1aarJXnkDVb2 8atMo7fQwIqEPIwzGXoqsD9jXhz/+MxEMRZDmtAq4FGm3QA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzlLC69eOCiyvt7i4Hm1c5Su7uN2c3pzDa124ti+3KIcDcJ3fzak1bWFBcI59pzfCTg2dQHpFDLxhGHg7C23/M= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:46d6:: with SMTP id h22mr4340809qto.315.1619114412132; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:00:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> In-Reply-To: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> From: Christopher Morrow Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 13:59:53 -0400 Message-ID: To: Nick Hilliard Cc: Randy Bush , SIDR Operations WG , Job Snijders Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000062cc9605c0937340" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:00:19 -0000 --00000000000062cc9605c0937340 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" nick got me before done... On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 1:54 PM Nick Hilliard wrote: > Christopher Morrow wrote on 22/04/2021 18:46: > > Not a lot of follow on this... (well, public follow up) > > > > So, I propose this course of action: > > 1) this document serves as a 'requirement (and possible solution)' > > that sidrops used to identify a problem > > 2) send this along as a query/question to the protocol group (IDR) > > with a request to: > > a) say: "go forth, this change seems ok, it's small and such" > > b) say: "Good googley-moogley! what are you crazypants people on > > about?? of COURSE this needs to be reviewed... please have AD-foobar > > spin up SIDR to properly handle this!! TUT-TUT! How cloud you conceive > > of a world other than this!!" > > and answer back in 2wks time, one fort-night! and two farthings! > > (or something, farthings are metric) > > do we need to involve IDR? Hard to tell really. Will they get upset if > they aren't consulted? (+ will they get ideas if they are?) > > I believe the process we were pitched when SIDR was --'d from existence was: "If you (sidrops) see a problem, you should write a document that serves as the problem description and requirement for fix-action. Take the document to IDR, who'll promptly do the 3-stooges: "not it" maneuver and hand us off to the AD who will SIDR++ and then we can chat about the problem in the SIDR venue, with possible protocol changes documented/implemented there." I was proposing that the current document under discussion seems like the: "there is a problem, we have a requirement to fix it, kthxbi!" > > provided no one screams at me about this WHILE I WRITE THE NEXT EMAIL.. > > we can send an adoption call/etc in 2wks time OR jump back into our SIDR > > pantsuit and get to the business of business. > > sounds good. The proposal doesn't seem to be horrible, several software > stacks have implemented it _and_ the rpki hasn't fallen over yet, so it > seems like so far, it's not a regression and it seems to fix something, > so ... yay? > ok! --00000000000062cc9605c0937340 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
nick got me before done...

On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 1:5= 4 PM Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
Ch= ristopher Morrow wrote on 22/04/2021 18:46:
> Not a lot of follow on this... (well, public follow up)
>
> So, I propose this course of action:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 1) this document=C2=A0serves as a 'requirement (and p= ossible solution)'
> that sidrops used to identify a problem
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 2) send this along as a query/question to the protocol=C2= =A0group (IDR)
> with a request to:
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0a) say: "go forth, this change seems ok= , it's small and such"
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0b) say: "Good googley-moogley! what are= you crazypants people on
> about?? of COURSE this needs to be reviewed... please have AD-foobar <= br> > spin up SIDR to properly handle this!! TUT-TUT! How cloud you conceive=
> of a world other than this!!"
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and answer back in 2wks time, one fort-nigh= t! and two farthings!
> (or something, farthings are metric)

do we need to involve IDR?=C2=A0 Hard to tell really. Will they get upset i= f
they aren't consulted?=C2=A0 (+ will they get ideas if they are?)


--00000000000062cc9605c0937340-- From nobody Thu Apr 22 11:04:13 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44CDE3A115D for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:04:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 JHcod0BRRNBe for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:04:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B16E3A1163 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:04:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-To: sidrops@ietf.org Received: from crumpet.local (admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 13MI41V6098187 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:04:01 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8] claimed to be crumpet.local To: Christopher Morrow Cc: Randy Bush , SIDR Operations WG , Job Snijders References: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> From: Nick Hilliard Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:04:00 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.47 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:04:13 -0000 Christopher Morrow wrote on 22/04/2021 18:59: > I believe the process we were pitched when SIDR was --'d from > existence was: "If you (sidrops) see a problem, you should write a > document that serves as the problem description and requirement for > fix-action. Take the document to IDR, who'll promptly do the > 3-stooges: "not it" maneuver and hand us off to the AD who will > SIDR++ and then we can chat about the problem in the SIDR venue, with > possible protocol changes documented/implemented there." Right, so bureaucratic mumble in order to make sure that the tickboxes which required the tickboxes to be ticked, are ticked. Great, wfm. Nick From nobody Thu Apr 22 11:14:17 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A20953A1258; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:14:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 nUzHDiAMPd1U; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:14:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 16BF83A1254; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:14:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lZdpz-0000gf-NB; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:14:03 +0000 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:14:04 -0700 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Christopher Morrow Cc: SIDR Operations WG , Job Snijders In-Reply-To: References: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 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: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:14:16 -0000 while i suspect that idr will not be overly excited, i am fairly sure the security community, especially the pki folk, will be *very* interested randy --- randy@psg.com `gpg --locate-external-keys --auto-key-locate wkd randy@psg.com` signatures are back, thanks to dmarc header butchery From nobody Thu Apr 22 11:15:30 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2C83A126C for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:15:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 PaUXUV_ZuSsk for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 D57813A1265 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lZdrI-0000h5-Iz; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:15:24 +0000 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:15:25 -0700 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Christopher Morrow Cc: SIDR Operations WG In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 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: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:15:29 -0000 ans, imino, it would be nice if, before the document went into "change this change that" it went a bit more deeply into what problem is being solved and a higher level view of how it is being solved. randy From nobody Thu Apr 22 11:19:12 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E03A43A12A9 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:19:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 9uk_Bh2R_1ci for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:19:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC5CF3A12A3 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:19:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-To: sidrops@ietf.org Received: from crumpet.local (admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 13MIJ238099964 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:19:03 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8] claimed to be crumpet.local To: Randy Bush Cc: Christopher Morrow , SIDR Operations WG References: From: Nick Hilliard Message-ID: <878e075d-b255-2870-855f-27b37244cf44@foobar.org> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:19:01 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.47 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:19:11 -0000 Randy Bush wrote on 22/04/2021 19:15: > ans, imino, it would be nice if, before the document went into "change > this change that" it went a bit more deeply into what problem is being > solved and a higher level view of how it is being solved. yes, please. The detail is in there, but you really have to sit down and think hard about what it's doing before it makes any sense, and even then you're left wondering if you really understand what's going on at all. Nick From nobody Tue Apr 27 04:14:51 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD3753A104C for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:14:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastly.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 cQ3QDJouBqW4 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:14:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com (mail-ed1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) (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 E0C113A104D for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:14:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id j28so5442877edy.9 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:14:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastly.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=in8LZgP+gHhTftX9jzPDQLHI/EtJiJUjXVWlrPPnmZM=; b=TL2CL1ueHcVUe1DeLM6Nwo3cecnNzr5WpcEArqXxCPobKJ+M3qNw2QETwSuIjOSLvp 1PObqEwnHSb42WkWbD57RJ6cMbPv03TtdlVP75IwF06H9pU3RWyM9wf4qTMbMHHZ0Sr/ 3qNeqpmzWtkKjhnn8NONxY/Gz3A/p4EEucUC8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=in8LZgP+gHhTftX9jzPDQLHI/EtJiJUjXVWlrPPnmZM=; b=GWzce2RkRQP/4c9hJfyLFE1P9rToRj0GCBGdQYVLBfvdmRgj1slMUc4reweJwAsSDU r5tUFe3TNrXEQfe+I8+1l/kxb78kAgU66WNObt9bZTF+GEOq7P644SrH3H+kMBZwmAfg +YaQinFPg+9OiKEdhgkzoB72CGY2zwrGw3yzYofLYMwnBmKlRRgb9sAAyPdIxlnRVTWZ Zek6DzEPi+CmTrnVqtTvWvMAQ7o6v0KYHWf19UcFqPOIymFzPrnw4jodVKVW59Tujc9D +0UkS1dnjIq7hki5m13kpF4ao/OT7v+2aaWa1OaXd2D5AYjCvAyMR+Msjh/GPmbFuqC5 /nNg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530DUfHSJxHRIlM3qyZB+8tn4iuH//yrZ3p5wJHikfypX1v8tG9t IdwgN5x7vFk3ujMzmqOdPw/DvbXCDsuGo2vDU83iavlGI/ZH3zTdSqVZO4kmp6qVQlB5y/rJoyN S6gauWuh0XoAsIOXw6ZFSk5Pj1vJLr79ujfETOK6IXPIJFwwoljctP7k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw/MZWOjbnD3Xk3w0nBRkthAE7bmjrvtplquCM4YgivLCnSQ9FlZ2EnfXM1bmcm74DPAuvRLA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:4a:: with SMTP id f10mr3592786edu.85.1619522081749; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snel (mieli.sobornost.net. [45.138.228.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u1sm2097191edv.90.2021.04.27.04.14.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:14:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 13:14:33 +0200 From: Job Snijders To: The S in RPKI stands for Security Message-ID: References: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 11:14:50 -0000 On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:14:04AM -0700, Randy Bush wrote: > while i suspect that idr will not be overly excited, i am fairly sure > the security community, especially the pki folk, will be *very* > interested The 'security community' is most welcome to provide review! Please invite them. They should be interested! I look forward to read actual arguments for- or against- the proposal (which is to apply the RFC 8360 validation algorithm to today's most popular policy OID). The SIDROPS working group definitely would benefit from more scrutiny. :-) The purpose of the internet-draft is to have a actual proposal in hand for discussion. The draft in its current form should be suitable for this purpose, it points at a problem, and it describes a solution. I am not exactly thrilled to go pound sand via a decades long 'requirements' -> 'evaluation' -> 'solutions' dance, especially since this exact discussion already is 10+ years old. From what I understand, no IETF tool was left unused to prevent this validation algorithm from actually being deployed. A call for working group adoption will make it clear whether the working group is interested to continue discussion of the problem at hand and the potential solution. If the working group does not wish to adopt this document, so be it. Even if the working group does adopt the internet-draft, I am not certain it'll make it to the RFC publication queue. Some study and testing is warranted. WG adoption does not equate RFC publication. The proposal *is* complicated (just like the current algorithm actually is quite complicated), and there are additional complications related to whether technical debt exists (or not exists) in 'libcrypto'. At the same time all validators already have a bunch of workarounds for rfc3779 'libcrypto' quirks, and the APIs are diverging as years go by. It would be my preference to focus discussion on the technical merits of RFC 8360-algorithm and any potential positive or negative implications, rather than focus on bureaucratic process. Kind regards, Job From nobody Tue Apr 27 04:24:26 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4A033A10E3 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:24:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastly.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 3rNZ5K2Ka0FT for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:24:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x52e.google.com (mail-ed1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52e]) (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 980C63A10D7 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:24:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id i24so9908233edy.8 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:24:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastly.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=vvOWXwxucPkPH4l5tLOYe2SE/gABfVo3sVKA2kgspXM=; b=I6BymXOqkzbW9Q+rhLIsstdvSc8P753acuDQpHksEnS5lgRIUXEwvr9E+M2CRgMeXT aAyfdcyUmq0oZVCeqqAhjbDc9z+xdlGxzRQ6n/5yS3Q70IJL/yS6ViPDTFvn3bexOvlz 062beJCSJT2CiZTf3sQ4y5jo2D1gR32CEzjSc= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=vvOWXwxucPkPH4l5tLOYe2SE/gABfVo3sVKA2kgspXM=; b=dswD1uW8msnjDY23TuGQkGa9jibJcohvnBBs8c7cSiyO+4tQgj1B/jLumOr0ZfOlXw daA4zc5pGubEpn0LRwIFpAQc8SApWx0I6Zy4XRI061UQPCL0UMA44U6aBaozxTTOA8eY 3JveI5z3YGDjHT6IOYqPFnOmYxh6XACXOQnFeZ3/Wt8TzRwRMzYmPPUtmX+IvVWGGtbW /wwJP8oXCv3nAEcwstwDhSMJV8j+1yUiEu6FFsEWLSsAZCGbg8/91GJ+RFD3Zr2tdL3y QZSbt9sGeOW3y6mhP1xsGyiDxd7IRj+4SjyDM8shck41RvA8S5Z/Uip30AJdPmhYad+w Cqcw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Cw0+X9TlOQlIj7CXqfmW+vac1zqRU35XCCx8ZRylqdkMWb888 pZdye8zM+BbIax7BjjPEyZmaoQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyswnWhSKrGHA2lIIYjf5iDq/8eaoRajr5BqdxEb5nrxApj9lMRJMCOhJIhCKKQaQord2Bwrw== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:db0c:: with SMTP id t12mr3659909eds.72.1619522656542; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snel (mieli.sobornost.net. [45.138.228.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id rs8sm4810803ejb.17.2021.04.27.04.24.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:24:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 13:24:12 +0200 From: Job Snijders To: Nick Hilliard Cc: Christopher Morrow , Randy Bush , SIDR Operations WG Message-ID: References: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 11:24:25 -0000 On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 06:54:35PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote: > The proposal doesn't seem to be horrible, several software stacks have > implemented it _and_ the rpki hasn't fallen over yet, so it seems like > so far, it's not a regression and it seems to fix something, so ... > yay? Small point of correction, as far as I know none of the validators is applying the 'new' algorithm to 'old' codepoints. None of the validators merged code to do so into their main branch. We provided these 3 code changesets for illustration purposes, to make it clear that the 9 pages of hard-to-read document update shuffle work, the ask to validator implementers actually is quite straight-forward and easy to implement (if the community chooses to do so). https://github.com/job/FORT-validator/commit/ff5f4b9313d5c553fa13bae427acb69665977727 https://github.com/job/rpki-rs/commit/d9fa8c72cf83ed6f25e4420eaaa9054078f15bc3 https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=161011710120123&w=2 I fully expect each validator implemeter to want to do additional refactoring/cleanup rather than verbatim copy+paste the above 3 changesets. There is no deployed code, but the 3 links make it clear it is trivial to get to a state of deployed code. In order for validation implementers to adopt something similar to the above changesets, some in the community requested an internet-draft exists to reference. Making changes of this nature without an at least an internet-draft existing would be detrimental to the cohesion of the ecosystem. Kind regards, Job From nobody Tue Apr 27 07:33:18 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietf.org Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 765AC3A0CB7; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 07:33:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: sidrops@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.28.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: sidrops@ietf.org Message-ID: <161953399336.25647.15772297467233062543@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 07:33:13 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Sidrops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidrops-roa-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 14:33:14 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the SIDR Operations WG of the IETF. Title : Problem Statement and Considerations for ROA containing Multiple Prefixes Authors : Zhiwei Yan Randy Bush Guanggang Geng Jiankang Yao Filename : draft-ietf-sidrops-roa-considerations-00.txt Pages : 6 Date : 2021-04-24 Abstract: The address space holder needs to issue an ROA object when it authorizes one or more ASes to originate routes to multiple prefixes. During the process of ROA issuance, the address space holder needs to specify an origin AS for a list of IP prefixes. Besides, the address space holder has a free choice to put multiple prefixes into a single ROA or issue separate ROAs for each prefix based on the current specification. This memo analyzes and presents some operational problems which may be caused by the ROAs containing multiple IP prefixes. Some suggestions and considerations also have been proposed. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidrops-roa-considerations/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-roa-considerations-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-roa-considerations-00 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 Apr 27 07:34:28 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B730A3A0CBB; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 07:34:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Z5H6AQ4i9LC4; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 07:34:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk1-x72f.google.com (mail-qk1-x72f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (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 8FE373A0CC1; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 07:34:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72f.google.com with SMTP id d19so24435801qkk.12; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 07:34:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=b+ie9JhmZBkC4QAd1Kphk8ne/cbPzd41ok1zaOi5DRk=; b=Q73Da0cSwOlY9k50mjBp3xCPojnzZcsPZtFHLN5iI2uJZ6ohx6XCzpGjz4JMZ8iLVO n+fFmaeBFTRQNdy+dlY2j7rrlkaN/ZhY4xxe8lDAeQOYWlCARMk7PIllOo32SOrloaRo /4IQEAON7ZNCBnxNrU9m39wK1Li5Eja/V01R7aT+WcZ9tTBNSoMTTxH8oaYN6m4NQPhM 9LAvwEtFcAqzWqrePNGJkd0PfIgakboCZByZ8K/ISNUPWg/FDFMKxFhMdqhAzFi4+Hba KYkbXoYumAUlZ8P23BiUYgLImF5CMKaC1IPCVv4HTSzGrg8+NEVJ755GyqazUuxpIe00 O4Wg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=b+ie9JhmZBkC4QAd1Kphk8ne/cbPzd41ok1zaOi5DRk=; b=bcay0pOXIUHbVQ9idTjIXVi3T3rA9St46s/2wpONBCjPx1Ns4oISOggvgLkfgxKyTE jzLp2lZV0KS9q/Qq+zzoJg6dITXsITWUn6KeIC/cLkwwWiG6vg1FL3G3c83vwFRwgdmk kkygQ+yHuV6NdW6SzPLZwljECdNm65fWnvvVySpAbivUCc0lL/Gxu1edRZPzhfmZeRa7 AwB6ViUBqDQ8nbexiwhYDirZ2FARN1Ikbuu+qrgqsF9J2Mtj/LkFbaDt2jvMbuQYuzmr 2q9tIEpx05LQajhiAGYAMVhQFyQW84NFbfkumN9QPAKa+377oC7E4Z+eAC0SmXWSQmqR o57w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530udsnetk8rNl7ML1r8vrSjYWp991oCV0aUkEnaZAUoG1HXg7FT LISNaNl9hFe88jIsID3fDVr+Pv9NWJyShnyYFpWMDXTUvwA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyuD8kIcThddAn3e3LfRKkNoM89JyjyhnsdCE9lSyJLsqkTFdSbweERDxGbZoxIpSjD14x+WKka+FNGVYyMpek= X-Received: by 2002:a37:a78d:: with SMTP id q135mr22910042qke.210.1619534045363; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 07:34:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87lfa94xyj.wl-morrowc@ops-netman.net> In-Reply-To: From: Christopher Morrow Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 10:33:54 -0400 Message-ID: To: Chris Morrow Cc: SIDROps Chairs , SIDR Operations WG , sidrops-ads@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000079c65b05c0f527be" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] [WG ADOPTION] draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations - 04/16/2021 X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 14:34:26 -0000 --00000000000079c65b05c0f527be Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 1:19 PM Christopher Morrow < christopher.morrow@gmail.com> wrote: > Howdy! > it's 5 days past the yard-arm.. and it seems like enough folk are > curious/interested that > we should adopt this. > > Will the authors please submit a renamed draft to the mill? > > and.. clicked the clicky, the draft rename should show up in the larger set of drafts now. > thanks! > -chris > co-working-group-chair-persona > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 1:38 PM Chris Morrow > wrote: > >> >> Howdy WG Folken, >> The authors of: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations >> >> had asked a while ago (probably 5 revisions ago :( ) for WG Adoption >> of their draft. The draft abstract is: >> >> "The address space holder needs to issue an ROA object when it >> authorizes one or more ASes to originate routes to multiple prefixes. >> During the process of ROA issuance, the address space holder needs to >> specify an origin AS for a list of IP prefixes. Besides, the address >> space holder has a free choice to put multiple prefixes into a single >> ROA or issue separate ROAs for each prefix based on the current >> specification. This memo analyzes and presents some operational >> problems which may be caused by the misconfigurations of ROAs >> containing multiple IP prefixes. Some suggestions and considerations >> also have been proposed." >> >> a) Please consider this a WG Call for Adoption of this draft. >> >> 2) Please take a few moments to read the ~5 page draft and send along >> comments/ >> questions/complaints(in the form of fixed text) to the authors. >> >> iii) this call expires 04/16/2021 - April 16 2021 >> >> Thanks! >> -chris >> wg-chair-persona >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sidrops mailing list >> Sidrops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops >> > --00000000000079c65b05c0f527be Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 1:19 PM Chris= topher Morrow <christoph= er.morrow@gmail.com> wrote:
Howdy!
it's 5 days past the yar= d-arm.. and it seems like enough folk are curious/interested that
we should adopt this.

Will the authors please submit a renamed draf= t to the mill?


a= nd.. clicked the clicky, the draft rename should show up in the larger set = of drafts now.
=C2=A0
thanks!
-chris
co= -working-group-chair-persona

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 1:38 PM Chris Mor= row <morrowc= @ops-netman.net> wrote:

Howdy WG Folken,
The authors of:
=C2=A0 https://datatracker= .ietf.org/doc/html/draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations

had asked a while ago (probably 5 revisions ago :( ) for WG Adoption
of their draft. The draft abstract is:

=C2=A0 "The address space holder needs to issue an ROA object when it<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0authorizes one or more ASes to originate routes to multiple pr= efixes.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0During the process of ROA issuance, the address space holder n= eeds to
=C2=A0 =C2=A0specify an origin AS for a list of IP prefixes.=C2=A0 Besides,= the address
=C2=A0 =C2=A0space holder has a free choice to put multiple prefixes into a= single
=C2=A0 =C2=A0ROA or issue separate ROAs for each prefix based on the curren= t
=C2=A0 =C2=A0specification.=C2=A0 This memo analyzes and presents some oper= ational
=C2=A0 =C2=A0problems which may be caused by the misconfigurations of ROAs<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0containing multiple IP prefixes.=C2=A0 Some suggestions and co= nsiderations
=C2=A0 =C2=A0also have been proposed."

a) Please consider this a WG Call for Adoption of this draft.

2) Please take a few moments to read the ~5 page draft and send along comme= nts/
questions/complaints(in the form of fixed text) to the authors.

iii) this call expires 04/16/2021 - April 16 2021

Thanks!
-chris
wg-chair-persona

_______________________________________________
Sidrops mailing list
Sidrops@ietf.org<= br> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops
--00000000000079c65b05c0f527be-- From nobody Tue Apr 27 09:40:23 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63A273A164F; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 09:40:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 j1IbT4gXBz5a; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 09:40:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 29C123A1649; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 09:40:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lbQkv-0000yE-Iy; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 16:40:13 +0000 Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 09:40:15 -0700 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Job Snijders Cc: The S in RPKI stands for Security In-Reply-To: References: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 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: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 16:40:23 -0000 > The 'security community' is most welcome to provide review! Please > invite them. They should be interested! traditionally, it is the author(s) and the wg chairs who initiate this. i suggest saag for starters; but ykmv randy From nobody Thu Apr 29 06:07:15 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0728A3A3E02; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:07:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.103 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.103 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FROM_GOV_DKIM_AU=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nist.gov 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 s_qD5wDH0z2o; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:07:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from GCC02-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm3gcc02on2139.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.91.139]) (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 A378E3A3DFE; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:07:06 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=NjwX1sfFq3POzzeuG9w2xNPW227covlL6QAzzifgiDiQo4qRtEBo9oym1tafL1FBohPsWCPUQQEqwxhaaQWTORHRZs1PTcKBx30Wbb/vwac1/uC0BkqVDSvIWxLFz/iYzSaLs6eWxoRjaLThloK+ZdrVaaLyOsKoTxZThCbiZD3yYBDDc1R2vlh6CPhHoLLH/jcWVrogz31usMcDkk5kR5LSyuDlrNO0BKd0aat2vZyOkGHPhKA1To95hpmcsAFY4XKRmauSKBTCB2QBrJCM0M4aQZDP7l0U0lm1hudfgMoCRo9nc8C/ttOkkTLV26IEJ5dEdzG8UDcx24SiNkvPvw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=SB84Hx5DEKYc5yBzOEFmLvz9IYfgGJd29pdw1RoNiLw=; b=fHlT1xVXfrP7eyW79vL5Qt928H/xB8D59A0w4grMXl6R2cFW/J5WmwhLAsGuOkcFOpt99uAGuDVmttxAAEf2KDkCaNuFrXtT1prruLNsvV9hjGZDBCZkLxd/xM42YknQR1p4JCmTbpasTm8DTFccoCTRtZRyCQFZjGrE/+b4CjkPg9sA6/vLDD/s5FwJXlGSjmMq0xJBqnvhCCWXSqtlLkZ+h5lbhT73Csh3ZRq3pwVp9W1kjqGFL9YGVVjn1M5jrcHKKKf6a5hsWuaxk+I83hV8Jyn4AmlXIdeUMURZ27LZrGfm/EUGz7LDWdLZnZPZXgdOUSNd01imCZ3Hf+/f1g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nist.gov; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nist.gov; dkim=pass header.d=nist.gov; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nist.gov; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=SB84Hx5DEKYc5yBzOEFmLvz9IYfgGJd29pdw1RoNiLw=; b=AXx3pOQ7ZynCvWAGaCuI+mtTUknerUnrB99E2/WN6zOmWXMYtFZqNvlKFUtecRWsfQ7qN+Aoh8vte9SBoU8N8xhy0Mf8HER8R/uJ0FJ6SzcY4NaP3WGkukNqneSFGuKRI9TlzbSOhGv/1bM5p23uoOQETR3L+4LSUeUZlOqDPJI= Received: from SA1PR09MB8142.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:806:171::8) by SA1PR09MB7680.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:806:172::18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4087.25; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:06:58 +0000 Received: from SA1PR09MB8142.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b528:53a6:340e:8da8]) by SA1PR09MB8142.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b528:53a6:340e:8da8%4]) with mapi id 15.20.4087.026; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:06:58 +0000 From: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" To: "sidrops@ietf.org" , "grow@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: NIST RPKI Monitor Version 2.0 Thread-Index: AQHXPPenSG5zSqVUfk67uaWvbtZvoarLdhaQ Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:06:58 +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: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=nist.gov; x-originating-ip: [129.6.223.159] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 267090cc-e137-4d0a-f2ab-08d90b0fabc4 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SA1PR09MB7680: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:4941; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:SA1PR09MB8142.namprd09.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(376002)(39860400002)(136003)(396003)(366004)(346002)(5660300002)(966005)(38100700002)(86362001)(33656002)(26005)(66476007)(66946007)(316002)(2906002)(2940100002)(71200400001)(64756008)(66556008)(76116006)(91956017)(52536014)(7696005)(66446008)(110136005)(8936002)(55016002)(450100002)(8676002)(558084003)(478600001)(6506007)(122000001)(186003)(9686003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: =?iso-8859-1?Q?KdRts+vz8FKdSbOos1B5CPW6CbMsMlezYlz1tS+hEp+eL2n4rrXhP/isYP?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?fQne2u5vMUC6phAHn+ZaNMQwG1mNgozwDjwInDlSjYY6lyRp3STJlKw6+D?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?UTzcaIDjgXfvmjF83AO1dRCtIIdmH8n6h1hd/2pCNm86P//n6dczMtmScV?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?1mpkfjpue3apCTQdnYjlgwG5eD4RrBdt5TI9Jsz6sRyRsi3nOK9X/jNQoy?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?HHDb/pRd+dYbEu0ntgwniX6HUfYf1ycD1mhuFQLncZ9hopZbWopAfuceeA?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?OWUqDSEOHbbmMLcxUpiAqYH8dUzxb2lWSHY/XOOJusVJohH8hHtzci/8en?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?wMLTbrcFwlJ7rMFiRVx+qA1zgCbX2aO55/qLb6VasM8eOoMS/vyvqX3t/w?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?sPgU6+Is4mt540LRCGgJN6rgpqCGqC22jZCqOxPb+qqAVAnToj5TVDQGky?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?zDoX88cklGX8QJYpzJk/3hv06U1Yd0xZH9Sy1CH+uLEzcz2y5GfzbceRmo?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?ILugOt9RAFsGminGFJG4LVD2oLOPNYdQAU1WnSn8K4jbSJpAQMEZ9AVca0?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?1FW9QDs+TdJXhaHFD+7yOxe5GmoKkHQGhbB0ISv5BEPW2iBTnts5nBRsh3?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?6wVn31+cC0PHiy22MH02TIXOqmXu8tUoMJ1+be3GpeZ5t559DCGCzXP++n?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?j/nbFzzrwmocW3XKnPqigrjc1H4mcnBgAzessHd1p8tiE2RlPR0j9QGTT3?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?i5bb46ovIfsFC4X/oHc9MAwnjxtLTJ/oZI6ye/Q9mYfVQEGKzmmd6p8KFd?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?EHaeLmt+3w2/RyfLyFh2urF0EecgGOM0Lvp+bjcZmaE5ai3UakC3gGDqX4?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?/fdjq+amGl6cRZUmPyKEKu/8jZ4Ab5xVe+jCDkw7N1WunY7CuygRmVqdl8?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?RfC+rve+Wx3tF9857091PNYjsBxuxn8YK4P3jfQ0iJgOeVplJmx91Z4ftk?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?J0sVZKBUsrMuW2Ytn0xLxvKpEUcpNejUvoag9xkd/fHpUajWUV66oXd3vh?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?oDZ2wJs2mpT3A4BhEKZKtaR+nmWLejftMkRZzs3/vnrJ86E2J2x2RKTdyd?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?Edc6+0Eg27od1sraD+ISCI7NM70G8wKwR1Not5yAcTYcC88cECwJk8VUkq?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?kMLDtl5eIO7fHDXOdQ6b4pROgKZS2dBBObx+V6VOvukoHmwQPspqC7cXGj?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?e8sNqt928xWTQ2TY9MbkcirlhzRVkU1bBxRLkMPXanVLdq6snGZJdHYmlM?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?hQcIqYIkX060kCOunPqqISUyC+LNmOmLpS2AWL2XPOOFE4c=3D?= x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True 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-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: SA1PR09MB8142.namprd09.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 267090cc-e137-4d0a-f2ab-08d90b0fabc4 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Apr 2021 13:06:58.2378 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2ab5d82f-d8fa-4797-a93e-054655c61dec X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SA1PR09MB7680 Archived-At: Subject: [Sidrops] NIST RPKI Monitor Version 2.0 X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:07:13 -0000 We (NIST) have released a new version of the NIST RPKI Monitor (v2.0):=0A= =0A= https://www.nist.gov/services-resources/software/nist-rpki-deployment-monit= or=0A= =0A= We are open to adding more features and analyses based on user feedback. Pl= ease feel free to share your comments/suggestions. Thank you.=0A= =0A= Sriram=0A= From nobody Thu Apr 29 11:38:38 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0533A3A12B3 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:38:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastly.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 xKxWayqg9GlH for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:38:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ej1-x62e.google.com (mail-ej1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62e]) (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 8367B3A1292 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:38:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id y7so2501495ejj.9 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:38:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastly.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=8XeXzlktP/IY/8H84LYms6QFV5BKdmgVB8Mj6VlR5T8=; b=DMXbZ8piyX93NcN0cG3LlsM6yvOqnCeaemaYaQRB2wXsiWKuh6RBR2O2lrrRPfmz1+ cgFIfQLRm6EN9cNXHhKuIW8At9Vj1S9UH+3hIFBvYRpCQgyxvHZOFQEKMOI89PEk0dkn memW8n41BP7mT2yJ9LdXcadrGJHj/Evvt9v14= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=8XeXzlktP/IY/8H84LYms6QFV5BKdmgVB8Mj6VlR5T8=; b=jiAt1mghTfGObHVAUhRPH7YJ/7TvICbVGTUKxWFNLfqIgnl2diuMxLPETslwXQ3RxY 4SO9Yvxo8ee6gyJwlcbD7Bqohun3ZsxyL8rfcFA6dkMqKYgfDH2QgtgJevN8qgHxQkTO /v5NtYutdDMnTjN4v3ie7gKMEobGoMR0XQOyRsaR0Gj07KcgS105+67/ZOrOdsJEa2Ez 4lOZj0GkVM9kQcC1G4KfVnxTl5EbSIms6jdQl9c6Z6Jjq07VRaGVo/6/TMXn6AICDss1 yb4aktnXZneLPEE+RuvWiEckHdzv0Wkl1ZdqNN8E3a6VHC++F7Kl/muGoyZGOq+PvF6N IJAg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531GOFkRkGAwBqdTzuHT2hmOMJngLGIovi2clNsf2D6fuwakT8Og IvObAWeMqkyxo3ok/6Vnxz5Vfg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyHOvsh/R+AdU55iPYrWIsb9V4ZpRpWIenYJsqtZvo40zqlxbM0IwhvzThXmgy9vhY/KZskNQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:e096:: with SMTP id gh22mr1366322ejb.101.1619721502496; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snel (mieli.sobornost.net. [45.138.228.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g17sm2857186edv.47.2021.04.29.11.38.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 20:38:20 +0200 From: Job Snijders To: Randy Bush Cc: sidrops@ietf.org Message-ID: References: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 18:38:36 -0000 On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 09:40:15AM -0700, Randy Bush wrote: > > The 'security community' is most welcome to provide review! Please > > invite them. They should be interested! > > traditionally, it is the author(s) and the wg chairs who initiate this. > i suggest saag for starters; but ykmv thank you for this pointer. I'm willing to work to present a case to the SAAG experts and invest time to bring non-sidrops experts up to speed on what the problem and context is, and then study the implications of the proposed solution. Of course, contigent on this working group being willing to adopt the internet-draft. :-) Kind regards, Job From nobody Thu Apr 29 12:25:04 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D54913A0553 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:25:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 RAYJ5VGSI9cz for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 53FD63A0542 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcCHR-0007cj-Fg; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 19:24:57 +0000 Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:24:57 -0700 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Job Snijders Cc: sidrops@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: <4d20e76a-6765-bc30-6441-b88ccf17e25d@foobar.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 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: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 19:25:02 -0000 >>> The 'security community' is most welcome to provide review! Please >>> invite them. They should be interested! >> >> traditionally, it is the author(s) and the wg chairs who initiate this. >> i suggest saag for starters; but ykmv > > thank you for this pointer. I'm willing to work to present a case to the > SAAG experts and invest time to bring non-sidrops experts up to speed on > what the problem and context is, and then study the implications of the > proposed solution. who knows? maybe they might even have something to teach us. randy From nobody Thu Apr 29 13:05:14 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D8B13A0B58 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:05:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastly.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 uHI-pg7ZlGuq for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:05:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ej1-x62e.google.com (mail-ej1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62e]) (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 EBB783A0B53 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id t4so18432191ejo.0 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:05:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastly.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=C7/uECHpCk9BpigHiH8+VZvBZ0qZiVWDXQT7SOIh+lM=; b=s5a0EutKVd+qIyKIny9wltVnAqvTl9GxYeOtVIhUQKVF8Kw0GZ4RO/LkUNIdxHSV0t ExmOJDSDrsUIC/WStD/j6Uy+qtl1Fs8xUshiHsiDxcnIXkHl7xq5IcvQ7A/WyVp9p8hs 4RfG1vMrhRx9LN5IBMfhRSHbkiFA3YHlZoe5g= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=C7/uECHpCk9BpigHiH8+VZvBZ0qZiVWDXQT7SOIh+lM=; b=TMvInWfWJ4Ucm+xJaGxSnCkofMKxLY8H1ehk5M2pFmnPtTsCgOM7Rr6oXoMHHYRVYy SPM0yFL15hRVtnaDZmJpbQ+w6aKu8ksajFHnAzeVICR2eBTks43Is4kt1WrC0GvrJlsK 0QtuZgLxsFaYbJz2aXJNnZW9o7TDzfl5r1y/3Tb1/BChbMBIPJjvTjw+GGN3H/mz4rku SjoODbjlEQvrnNcXs5Na/etoupO7tUiakaLC4LTxi3gSpyRZpmWmuOIZrQ1871ODvc58 ob0UTKmhn8c5RgK0hcpVZ0cloxm+RWnpDr5urTD8/ACfy6XUMEzeOYuSLjfUSliiEdiS TJLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Fuzdh4Nh0PFZFrJEGX3E45uFYFFVyHhpIcUxCfIJuBj0HgAmx dLmPe+6I3z7tjwdZFgVC0BkX9A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxwSCPgWX3jt4wMPuSsFmv93VOBhCrxUOm/uVhSByy8kZTYUOv8d3z0GpRrPHmTc2K8m3shjQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:724d:: with SMTP id ds13mr254153ejc.442.1619726703085; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snel (mieli.sobornost.net. [45.138.228.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b9sm2012661edt.2.2021.04.29.13.05.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 22:05:01 +0200 From: Job Snijders To: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" Cc: "sidrops@ietf.org" , "grow@ietf.org" Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Sidrops] NIST RPKI Monitor Version 2.0 X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 20:05:13 -0000 Dear Sriram, Doug, others, On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 01:06:58PM +0000, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) wrote: > We (NIST) have released a new version of the NIST RPKI Monitor (v2.0): > > https://www.nist.gov/services-resources/software/nist-rpki-deployment-monitor > > We are open to adding more features and analyses based on user > feedback. Please feel free to share your comments/suggestions. Thank > you. I would like to express appreciation to you and the NIST team for operating the RPKI Monitor, and offer my congratulations on the launch of version 2! The Monitor serves as a useful reference & resource, and also has become an iconic online landmark for the RPKI community. It's now almost 8 years old? A very respectable age! :-) Running a non-commercial public online resource (without ads!) for multiple decades requires a lot of commitment and planning. I am thankful NIST has taken on this particular work. In my opinion NIST is performing great service to the RPKI community. It is my hope that NIST will keep running this service for at least another 8 years! Thank you. Kind regards, Job