IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sidr] WG adoption poll for draft-huston-rpki-validation-01

"Carlos M. Martinez" <carlosm3011@gmail.com> Tue, 29 April 2014 17:21 UTC

Return-Path: <carlosm3011@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 749171A092A for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:21:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 j3BdVC1AnQbA for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:21:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yk0-x22b.google.com (mail-yk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 856FC1A04AF for <sidr@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:21:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yk0-f171.google.com with SMTP id 10so458604ykt.30 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:21:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QuOQ9DeDuQDAO2ESMPW9yzEar3lRerruJFLdkO1SLFo=; b=cxq4jP/1Ts9F+G/BVyZkDLhpPJJYIl6xs2ZAPD+LG2O6e52h0bU56Xrw7YvnNKZZDY JTDtmbIK2ytyvaniFgw6Rh0ZM0aS8I0pYH4NelBqFyEwGONFM9t8gE0dqDKwUJShb+qI RVgLhxsz9MnfO8nYDdyiGv4duMk0yb2F9Lekv9Ze5ztMrHJ8RWKmoH8ag5ykk9b/TqlZ iLqjFuA4CgSLNFw70rSZZW4ogjM4V3y+rlROSvdS9edd+k/Xab+ytQvgZQgBzQ8lbDlW USkcxoZdyxjwrnuk623VfHnibC4Q9LJW8RLn5PBS3h7BvnqpOd8JyLSh1UwN0wNfLXPn Es4A==
X-Received: by 10.236.198.243 with SMTP id v79mr22640625yhn.87.1398792107311; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:21:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 87-7-200.lacnic.net.uy ([2001:13c7:7001:7000:413a:6c5b:b970:f765]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j76sm37775732yhi.33.2014.04.29.10.21.44 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <535FDFA6.1010106@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:21:42 -0300
From: "Carlos M. Martinez" <carlosm3011@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andy Newton <andy@arin.net>
References: <BBA7CCE4-1A6C-4D06-A5DC-54B93A1D2202@tislabs.com> <m2k3ad5iv3.wl%randy@psg.com> <B7457221-E03B-4D8C-86AA-3DD9A599D27E@arin.net>
In-Reply-To: <B7457221-E03B-4D8C-86AA-3DD9A599D27E@arin.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/B6oferUgbBY-rvmjIx541WnWemM
Cc: Sandra Murphy <sandy@tislabs.com>, sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] WG adoption poll for draft-huston-rpki-validation-01
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: carlos@lacnic.net
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 29 Apr 2014 17:21:49 -0000

I support adoption of this draft and I second all of Andy's comments.

I do believe that we need to be tolerant in the operation of the CA's as
we move forward in adoption of origin validation in routers.

Cheers!

~Carlos

On 4/28/14, 5:14 PM, Andy Newton wrote:
> I support the adoption of this draft, as it makes the operations of a CA less problematic.
> 
> I also 100% disagree with Randy’s view that it adds complexity. To the contrary, it lessens complexity, aids flexibility and decreases fragility.
> 
> -andy
> 
> On Apr 25, 2014, at 3:06 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> 
>> i really hate to side with dr kent :)
>>
>> i am unsure of this is a useful work item.  please explain how it is
>> other than a complex (i.e. dangerous) patch to accommodate sloppy
>> operational praactices by a CA.  
>>
>> make the protocol complex and you are vulnerable forever.  sloppy CA
>> ops practices can always be remedied.  so which is the worse problem?
>>
>> randy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sidr mailing list
>> sidr@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email