Re: [Idr] [sidr] Levels of BGPsec/RPKI validation, was: Re: wglc for draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-11

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Wed, 29 April 2015 23:18 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94AF81A8772; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HmZoQBCFZ4KG; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:18:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4C621A873C; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:18:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1YnbFY-0001PA-DO; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 23:18:40 +0000
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:18:38 +0900
Message-ID: <m2d22mfrqp.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi" <kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov>
In-Reply-To: <CY1PR09MB079352552ED82496B5A4513D84D70@CY1PR09MB0793.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
References: <4C184296-F426-40EF-9DB6-3AE87C42B516@tislabs.com> <91148102-DADB-42E8-96A0-E89120642894@tislabs.com> <ECDAD8F2-1C27-4494-887C-59280D7FF973@muada.com> <EF4348D391D0334996EE9681630C83F02D173BEB@xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com> <B1EDF7B6-1E42-440E-BD3F-29723AD7E4A4@muada.com> <986c7f50a5300c46ad05afb643be3a1d@mail.mandelberg.org> <4C80F9CE-06F9-4FB7-852B-BF1B205738FC@muada.com> <CY1PR09MB079302CC52C7791F3C0C512984D70@CY1PR09MB0793.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <CF9FE7BA-C934-401C-B2F4-0CE4AF062ECC@muada.com> <CY1PR09MB079352552ED82496B5A4513D84D70@CY1PR09MB0793.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/n-Zkyjz2DQf64h-RkyFojxYdwXk>
Cc: David Mandelberg <david@mandelberg.org>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "sidr@ietf.org" <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [sidr] Levels of BGPsec/RPKI validation, was: Re: wglc for draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-11
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 23:18:46 -0000

> First:
> There should be operational BCP recommendation based on the principle of make-before-break
> ( in doc like https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-05 ):
> 1. Certificate should be renewed and pre-published in advance of expiry of the current certificate; 
> There should be overlapping validity period bridging the two (current and new certs).
> (See https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover-03  and
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/92/slides/slides-92-sidr-5.pdf  ) 
> 2. The update for the prefix should be re-originated (by origin AS) or re-propagated (by a transit AS).
> Basically, whoever got a new certificate should do this refresh within the above overlap period. 
> 
> The above two BCP steps, if followed, will help prevent "couldn't validate because of certificate lifetime".
> 
> Second:
> The operational BCP can also say:
> Allow a certain grace period before you act on the update that became 'Not Valid' due to cert expiry.
> (Earlier Sandy also mentioned this.)  
> 
> Your other scenario "validation failed because of a bad signature or bad certificate chain" is fine. 
> In this scenario, the update is labeled 'Not Valid' for good reason.


From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Subject: Re: [sidr] [Idr] Levels of BGPsec/RPKI validation, was: Re: wglc for draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-11
To: Roque Gagliano <rogaglia@cisco.com>
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, sidr wg <sidr@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 12:07:02 +0900

ca software should warn the user of upcoming expiration of certs, ee
certs, roas, crls, drivers' licenses, ...

but what is the user gonna do?  they're gonna renew.  so maybe renew
automagically and tell the user?

randy