Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC: draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds

George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> Thu, 18 February 2021 00:40 UTC

Return-Path: <ggm@algebras.org>
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 9BFD63A1E81 for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:40:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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=algebras-org.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 9yW4KhtrZT5I for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:40:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) (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 382023A1311 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:40:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id u4so1578166lfs.0 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:40:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=algebras-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mTnHxV9cx2G56g4xGOmElGP9UyuQHXZ1gurR15iPeek=; b=I/0ac2hToRNyd6f0fu0L59fhJ2GKNgexgrl2h8/GW5465Awv1Yumpj++i/Wbr9mvzd WpkcTZsscYA2VwWwYZQpkT1T973YcpGvWuHc1F8evgLlZEewLhvrdL5AGUWBD42oxlbw HphWUINfEt264roS0AbbZaa955GkCdXdxNjnS5iuUFl5QR0Jsq73Rn68TIWU6COLfjMH cbCLJBlrT8EEz0vQV+aVhGu1seuUQmh3T9HC2IHzILVK1KqHZyncVlOv0wNWrT2awN+L /zXd839fWOND3D14efm1XuxJZZaG+5rKDw3MMFZvb+rRRWlm59ezLkZ9m/ymOh5eTdmR jmSQ==
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=mTnHxV9cx2G56g4xGOmElGP9UyuQHXZ1gurR15iPeek=; b=VK75yQcZxsOINSlaSgN7tNiwAV+YFSxsy8AH0Anb7a6+NmSo/eHm9dASUJ0TDS3nxI zXBiRcv6Anhn5vl8V457M14RyArkLdlqfYRwIKZH0DI1TL53D4jMxpXUKFff44KOtIVy lNcNJOm0x6jn9GYP0HwQfF3L+hExHt3eSGjA3TzxHrHN6RKPCtFid6piSS9w3X2J+0OU 8f7uaw3F4vQDbLySDOgCFG+innKDsJRmRLcV+Z2YK/bq/Y+MEP1EuBPeH33+ZITs3rJo Oa2Ly5o3WXG839oekCv3fSk4Aemp5BVPt6OtqDZZxYOYUyRZZy43jQyzf3HlPxgmUlGM 4Qlw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530h0n48+EUrAitLoMFYaDqnURjwjxwTQgJ2lFstWqW9Ap91VCrF krT6fsIEhGpp5h5zKl7o2fq2rj6myKts/wYv5wO8ww==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwiMp4jNP1XwzPsvvG3XKdsSTlgpqGW+UtNi+yX4U/nr5RvYZ8fkFfLwUQ3+OtqAubtj+ee0ls8hlWgoJqcxWc=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:711e:: with SMTP id m30mr821652lfc.97.1613608801918; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:40:01 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BN6PR11MB1667D4EB91373CCB7F7A3F5AB8A09@BN6PR11MB1667.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <BN6PR11MB166714171776B9AF0AC8F04EB88F9@BN6PR11MB1667.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <m2czwyi88j.wl-randy@psg.com> <CAMGpriUAkXybSAnDNcxyWjA_X2tNqFqiiTM0c1LYLUSrV0bQdw@mail.gmail.com> <m27dn6i5mw.wl-randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <m27dn6i5mw.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:39:50 +1000
Message-ID: <CAKr6gn3vHNAcOaGe2tgnt+iJCfaBLnjrNeKAL7BOWBPd_93c5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com>, Ops Area WG <opsawg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/scexdYyXqEWQEVeF81tt65CUK-c>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC: draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds
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: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 00:40:10 -0000

Thats a good question. Whois lookups CAN ask for superior covering
blocks. Its in the protocol to do it (flags) in the port 43 query. I
don't think its normal.

This is the problem with data services which push to the most specific
record (and, in Whois, many exist) and inclusion of signing, which
strongly depends on chain verification which automatically includes
the parents as necessary components of the proof. One method you punch
to the edge. The other, you get the path along with the edge.

It's about making a decision. How do you guide what people do?

(shepherd hat) I didn't mean to perturb a process in WGLC. I think
this is worth discussing, I am unsure it has to be said in this draft,
I don't object to people working it out if it makes sense. It is
actually kind-of a side observation in the shepherd write-up as-is.
-G

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 10:25 AM Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>
> > But if a lookup process was interested in finding a geofeed for an IP
> > address within B, would it have any reason or automated means to
> > backtrack and lookup knowledge of the signed geofeed for A?  Do
> > inetnum lookups return all superprefix inetnums as well?  (asking for
> > a friend)
>
> whoops!
>
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg