[auth48] [AD] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9319 <draft-ietf-sidrops-rpkimaxlen-15> for

[Rebecca VanRheenen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Sriram and *Warren,

Sriram, we have updated the document to use "RPKI-ROV” as requested. We will also add ROV and RPKI-ROV to our abbreviations list.

*Warren, as AD, please review and approve the change to "RPKI-ROV” throughout the document. The changes are probably best viewed in this diff file: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319-auth48diff.html. See the email thread below for further information on this change.

_______________

Updated XML file:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319.xml

Updated output files:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319.txt
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319.pdf
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319.html

Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319-auth48diff.html

Diff files showing all changes:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319-diff.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319-rfcdiff.html (side-by-side diff)
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9319-alt-diff.html (shows changes where text was moved/deleted)

For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9319

Thank you,

RFC Editor/rv



> On Oct 10, 2022, at 3:32 PM, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Rebecca,
>  
> I checked with my co-authors. Ben said, “… so I will leave the final call to you.”  My other co-authors have not expressed any objection.
>  
> So, I would like to request you to proceed with this change:
>  
> s/RPKI-based ROV/RPKI-ROV/    (I counted 3 places)
> s/ROV/RPKI-ROV/    (I counted 5 places)
>  
> Just FYI… a BITAG (Broadband Internet Technical Advisory Group) report on "The Security of the Internet’s Routing Infrastructure" is soon to be published. It has a large number authors/contributors, all well-known names in the networking community. Many of them are also active participants in IETF-SIDROPS and MANRS.  I just found out that they also use RPKI-ROV acronym throughout the document.
>  
> You may also plan to include ROV and RPKI-ROV in the IETF abbreviations list:
> ROV   - Route Origin Validation
> RPKI-ROV   - RPKI-based Route Origin Validation
>  
> Thank you.
>  
> Sriram
>  
> From: Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) 
> Sent: Monday, October 3, 2022 4:45 PM
> To: Ben Maddison <[e-mail]>; Rebecca VanRheenen <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Job Snijders <[e-mail]>
> Cc: RFC Editor <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Chris Morrow <[e-mail]>; Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9319 <draft-ietf-sidrops-rpkimaxlen-15> for
>  
> Rebecca and Ben,
>  
> I see the dilemma that both RFC Editors and authors are having. I think we can set the course straight here for this document as well as for future IETF documents with respect to acronym for RPKI-based Route Origin Validation.
>  
> I am proposing leaving ROV definition like what Ben pointed out: ROV == Route Origin Validation (this is found in the existing literature).
>  
> So, in this document, I propose we use the acronym RPKI-ROV for RPKI-based Route Origin Validation. We will first use it in the abstract by replacing (ROV) with (RPKI-ROV).
>  
> I scanned and find that we have used ROV in the document in only a few places and always meant it to be RPKI-based Route Origin Validation. Therefore,
>  
> s/ROV/RPKI-ROV/   (globally)
>  
> Then, we replace the new paragraph in the Introduction as follows:
>  
> Old Text:
>  
>    Please note that the term "RPKI-based Route Origin Validation" and
>    the corresponding acronym "ROV" that are used in this document mean
>    the same as the term "Prefix Origin Validation" used in [RFC6811].
>  
> New Text:
>  
>    Please note that the term "RPKI-based Route Origin Validation" and
>    the corresponding acronym "RPKI-ROV" that are used in this document mean
>    the same as the term "Prefix Origin Validation" used in [RFC6811].
>  
> End of New Text.
>  
> Note: It is good to establish a unique acronym for RPKI-based ROV since there is also IRR-based ROV in the literature elsewhere. People may loosely use ROV for RPKI-ROV colloquially and that is OK. It does not concern us in this document.
>  
> I hope this helps.
>  
> Sriram