Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz

Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net> Tue, 06 September 2016 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <morrowc@ops-netman.net>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DBEF12B4C2; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 09:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.409
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.409 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.508, SPF_PASS=-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 pRspGV0kq7f2; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 09:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net (relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net [IPv6:2606:700:e:550:5c82:28ff:fe25:4960]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BD0112B56C; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:58:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.ops-netman.net (mailserver.ops-netman.net [199.168.90.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay.kvm02.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 399F24089E; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 15:58:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from morrowc-glaptop4.roam.corp.google.com.ops-netman.net (unknown [104.132.12.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 274EE4DE0D19; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 15:58:47 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 11:58:46 -0400
Message-ID: <yj9o7fapuiix.wl%morrowc@ops-netman.net>
From: Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>
To: "Carlos M. Martinez" <carlosm3011@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <349cb6ac-f4fe-29e5-b01f-3223b14e47de@gmail.com>
References: <yj9ooa46aumt.wl%morrowc@ops-netman.net> <AAE3F119-98A3-4618-BBFB-76F921316BD1@gmail.com> <349cb6ac-f4fe-29e5-b01f-3223b14e47de@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Organization: Operations Network Management, Ltd.
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/565qkC8uceRPbFxYX4HUdrGpi1g>
Cc: Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>, sidr-ads@ietf.org, sidr-chairs@ietf.org, sidr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidr/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 16:07:10 -0000

At Mon, 5 Sep 2016 19:54:53 -0300,
"Carlos M. Martinez" <carlosm3011@gmail.com>; wrote:
> 
> Here is the pointer to the document:
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rir-rpki-allres-ta-app-statement-01
> 
> Apologies for my earlier laziness.

no worries, yes Sandy and I chatted about this... err, I think the end
 result was: "is this an ops thing? should this go to ops? or should
 we just adopt it in SIDR and jam it through?"

I think sandy was due to send 'authors'(you/andy/etc) a mail about
this... oh and we're waiting on Alvaro to reply to this as well.

I'll mail an update to the list.

> 
> On 9/5/2016 3:32 PM, Carlos M. Martinez wrote:
> > Hi Chris,
> > 
> > I know we already discussed this over private email, but perhaps you can
> > comment on the list on the future of the requested WG adoption call for
> > the ‘all resources’ applicability statement draft.
> > 
> > thanks!
> > 
> > -Carlos
> > 
> > On 2 Sep 2016, at 17:56, Chris Morrow wrote:
> > 
> >>
> >> Howdy SIDR peeps,
> >> (+bonus ops ad)
> >>
> >> Following on the Berlin meeting we were trying to accomplish two
> >> things:
> >>
> >>   1) get all documents related to sidr protocols into wglc and then
> >>   publication
> >>
> >>   2) get all documents which are more operationally focused moved
> >>   along to an ops group (sidr-ops or something akin to that)
> >>
> >> With that in mind there are 8 documents in the publication queue:
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis
> >>
> >> and 11 still in progress. Of the 11 left Sandy and I think they
> >> roughly break down like:
> >>
> >> Documents which should move to the ops group:
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light - authors notified/queried
> >> about this
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying
> >>
> >> documents which should finish out in sidr:
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-publication
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup - pub request in flight
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-slurm - authors recently updated
> >>   draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions - wglc imminent
> >>
> >> I think if there's no meaningful discussion on change for these
> >> between now and 9/16/2016 (Sept 16th) we will assume this list is
> >> correct. For documents in the 'move' list, if progress to publication
> >> happens 'good!'. For all documents in the 'stays' list:
> >>   1) we aim to have wglc by Seoul
> >>   2) publication requests started on as many as possible
> >>
> >> We plan to meet in Seoul, but not in Chicago (Mar 2017) where we
> >> expect the ops group to exist and meet. We can progress documents in
> >> SIDR after Seoul, but the WG should close out shortly after the new
> >> year. (or that's the goal).
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >> -chris
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> sidr mailing list
> >> sidr@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr