Re: [sidr] Proposal for next steps - chartering sidrops?

Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> Wed, 24 August 2016 01:05 UTC

Return-Path: <sean@sn3rd.com>
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 6CF6F12DB46 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sn3rd.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 rXuRBlnwX2lF for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22a.google.com (mail-qk0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22a]) (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 5152312DC01 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id z190so1735287qkc.0 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sn3rd.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Qfcfy2oPcEu3x3FVlveafZG6C0HN88MetN434hJhy2U=; b=f/HIQ4+j5LW2gRiu8v+d3p7VboDga6Hk315lRC5togr2k0W2le5CGSl+8QU/ZSUtE5 WhBTllpDzJQCii6P//iLbV2VIqttWc6vedqfQMye1zgzbCdmy10QeX9nsOtCarNTKtfQ LQdQxbGTriMy+RMm4iAhyV3Fnw94dHPeXTsJE=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Qfcfy2oPcEu3x3FVlveafZG6C0HN88MetN434hJhy2U=; b=VE8i7VH3EBf+yPKPZh5sP8Ih6STeaurJlFAvdV1rzW1ichrU6cX9QBjLRhgGwyO6Xi x1mJ5zwiCrGd3R9vAlyJxLgdlvupV8syohDhXg1ku+jZPBAUywTG11dtJPASBQ43X03c jm5Y1ZcVJg312dcnGTSSQefgcH2BIRSVPDypds/B87U6XpmV74ZFiS1yBZjqFprt9H3n dN05LbEZZr3Wvh7IuVXwRVPXWHjyocevJ+T1QEc2llN+MBy9M9ngLjgJ3JwD/zRWsgUj +EbGzHnnqqSmf9HVss/mRWKefKan62DhFGwcGGI4hE9p4cpa7LqNw74csvk6EcHmzenb kBjw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOXNmTxPP1tzFWOiIOJzSMJ3E+CpcV4FAMSJ3D0QXCwnbUGwo5DPO61e6DwZDD8Og==
X-Received: by 10.55.114.193 with SMTP id n184mr406554qkc.4.1472000739484; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:05:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.0.112] (pool-173-73-120-170.washdc.east.verizon.net. [173.73.120.170]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w67sm3269627qkb.45.2016.08.23.18.05.38 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
In-Reply-To: <f7b3f43c-98e4-5e0d-b48e-a11e374c70f4@bogus.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 21:05:36 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <99C86FCF-6095-46BB-9B66-FC9B193EE4EC@sn3rd.com>
References: <dd98327d-4487-d9dc-af63-82ed5ed2f5aa@bogus.com> <71D7D3ED-BC1C-408C-BB56-832C6E27E37A@zdns.cn> <f7b3f43c-98e4-5e0d-b48e-a11e374c70f4@bogus.com>
To: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/BG2ySDaf_0O2e47nygSMDvmli5s>
Cc: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>, routing-ads@ietf.org, sdir-chairs@ietf.org, sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] Proposal for next steps - chartering sidrops?
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: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 01:05:41 -0000

> On Aug 22, 2016, at 17:03, joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> wrote:
> 
> On 8/17/16 7:43 PM, Declan Ma wrote:
>> Joel,
>> 
>> When we are talking about SIDROPS,  we are referring to that BGP speakers are resorting to RPKI relying party to get verified INR authorization information, which is created by CA and maintained by repository managers.
>> 
>> IMHO, network operators are not the only RPKI role that the community is going to solicit input from.  CA operators, repository operators, RP service providers all bear significance as with SIDR Operations, in identifying issues and sharing experiences. 
> Yeah there are a bunch of actors who are operators of elements other
> than networks.
> 
> RIRs and CAs spring immediately to mind.
>> Although network operators could also be CA operators, repository operators, RP service providers, yet RIRs, CA and repository backend service providers, and third party RP don’t fall into the category of  ‘network operators’.  
>> 
>> I would suggest the “The goals of the sidr-ops working group” be adjusted slightly, with CA operators, repository operators, RP service providers involved.
> yeah I think the tent should be inclusive.

I agree with Di+Joel so +1.

spt