Re: [sidr] WG acceptance call for draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting

I am very concerned the impact this kind of activity has on the integrity of public allocation registries.

How are external parties meant to understand what should exist, if the RPKI signing leaps over intermediate parties that are explicitly listed as having substantive authority over the disposition of resources?

I am struggling to imagine how this activity happens in the context of lawsuit, and the risk of lawsuit by the skipped-over party, and other unrelated parties.

The Grandparent has no contractual relationship with the Grandchild. What is the basis for entering into an agreement to certify these resources, rather than performing a publicly recognized transfer of control? Whats the long-term relationship between the new child, and the Grandparent? on what basis does RPKI certification continue, or cease? Does the parent retain any control? What if the parent does wake up an RPKI engine, and issues conflicting signing state? 

I don't think these are subjects which vest well inside the IETF process, or an RFC. I think they go to address policy questions  currently handled inside the RIR policy framework, by address holders. Since the affected parties include address holders I cannot see how this should be documented or defined outside of that process.

-George

On 05/08/2012, at 4:12 AM, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> On behalf of SIDR WG chairs I would like to initiate 2 weeks acceptance call for draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting starting from today, August 4th. Please send your positive or negative feedback to the mailing list or directly to chairs.
> 
> Thank you,
> Alexey
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr