IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sidr] working group adoption poll for draft-huston-sidr-rfc6490-bis

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Tue, 11 February 2014 07:16 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.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 CCE701A08D7 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 23:16:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=ham
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 A4KM3lRDd7sb for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 23:16:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73E4A1A0741 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 23:16:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1WD7a1-00079d-Pt; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:16:30 +0000
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:16:28 +0900
Message-ID: <m2sirq15mb.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Geoff Huston <gih902@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BE1A23E7-E654-4267-8CBF-7B1610C0D93F@gmail.com>
References: <24B20D14B2CD29478C8D5D6E9CBB29F6940A90C5@HSV-MB001.huntsville.ads.sparta.com> <m2ha8a8cb1.wl%randy@psg.com> <1B60AC34-6528-4505-B1C7-D92CA7E128D7@ripe.net> <DCAF237A-C70A-4311-9232-69499F97CE0B@gmail.com> <8451BEAE-465F-49AF-9AE0-DD6C8D567714@cisco.com> <BE1A23E7-E654-4267-8CBF-7B1610C0D93F@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Cc: sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] working group adoption poll for draft-huston-sidr-rfc6490-bis
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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, 11 Feb 2014 07:16:33 -0000

>    If the connection to the preferred URI fails, or the fetched CA
>    certificate public key does not match the TAL public key, the RP
>    SHOULD fetch the CA certificate from the next URI, according to the
>    local preference ranking.

in the case of a key mismatch, there would be significant benefit of
reporting it.  but to whom and how?  

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email