IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Fri, 21 May 2021 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D7B3A21D0; Fri, 21 May 2021 14:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 ZUoKwgR2lb-8; Fri, 21 May 2021 14:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (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 65DA53A21CF; Fri, 21 May 2021 14:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kduck.mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 14LLjtp0000374 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 21 May 2021 17:46:00 -0400
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 14:45:55 -0700
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>, ggm@algebras.org, opsawg@ietf.org, opsawg-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20210521214555.GX32395@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <162149688912.26611.7060363738222603934@ietfa.amsl.com> <m2h7ivzt0c.wl-randy@psg.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <m2h7ivzt0c.wl-randy@psg.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/Lb2LX_UHSjpRozsQLUnsS1BDg0Y>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 21:46:05 -0000

On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 02:17:23PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> i have a vague hope -14, just published, addresses all currently
> expressed concerns.  but i am under my quota for wrongness for the day.

If we're going with "[#RPKI Signature] address range MUST match [inetnum:
followed to get here]", then there are probably a couple places that still
talk about "covered by" that should catch up.

We may also need to look more closely at the bits after "# RPKI Signature".
The example uses a CIDR range, but IIRC inetnum: ranges are not limited to
CIDR blocks, which would mean we need a story for how to handle non-CIDR
blocks.

-Ben

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email