Re: [OPSAWG] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-9092-update-10: (with COMMENT)

[Randy Bush <[e-mail]>]

>>    Any particular inetnum: object SHOULD have, at most, one geofeed
>>    reference, whether a remarks: or a proper geofeed: attribute when it
>>    is implemented.  A geofeed: attribute is preferred, of course, if the
>>    RIR supports it.  If there is more than one type of attribute in the
>>    intetnum: object, the geofeed: attribute SHOULD be used.
>> 
>> Is there a reason that the second SHOULD, to prefer the geofeed:
>> attribute isn’t a MUST?  Otherwise, there isn’t deterministic behavior
>> on which attribute will be used and geofeed: won’t necessarily be
>> preferred.
> 
> i think we have been over this one before, but i can not remember the
> rationale.  unless i hear otherwise from co-authors or general public,
> i am happy to change the second to MUST.
> 
> note that below i suggest also making the first SHOULD a MUST to make
> life a bit simpler.  i do not remember why we wussed out on this.

sigh.  a shy co-author reminded me privately that, to make it illegal to
have both a remarks: geofeed reference and a geofeed: attribute would
mandate that RIRs look *inside* all remarks: attributes.  as a compiler
writer in a long ago previous life, i really do not like looking inside
comments.

>> ** Section 3
>>    For inetnum:s covering the same address range, or an inetnum: with
>>    both remarks: and geofeed: attributes, a signed geofeed file SHOULD
>>    be preferred over an unsigned file.
>> 
>> Is the net result of this guidance that when encountering a both types
>> of attributes, and despite preferring the geofeed, an implementation
>> still needs to download both and see which one is signed?
> 
> this runs into trouble with the previous, especially if it becomes
> 
>     If there is more than one type of attribute in the intetnum: object,
>     the geofeed: attribute MUST be used.
> 	
>> Effectively:
>> 
>> If there is more than one type of attribute in the intetnum: object,
>> the geofeed: attribute SHOULD be used unless the remarks: is signed?
> 
> or vice versa, of course

if we leave the two SHOULDs, though sloppy, it provides pretty direct
instruction to the fetching application without getting us into
operational knots.

randy