Re: [sidr] RPKI validator testing summary

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Thu, 01 December 2011 07:00 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.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 66C011F0C68 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 23:00:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_DOSE=2.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o7kMmZG-rLOd for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 23:00:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1992B1F0C67 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 23:00:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1RW0co-000CSO-8E; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 07:00:06 +0000
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 16:00:32 +0900
Message-ID: <m239d4epyn.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Andrew Chi <achi@bbn.com>
In-Reply-To: <4ED64E04.7030408@bbn.com>
References: <4ED64E04.7030408@bbn.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: sidr wg <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] RPKI validator testing summary
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 07:00:07 -0000

> 2. AIA correctness.  Does res-certs require validators to reject a 
> certificate with a messed up AIA URI, even if top-down traversal is ok? 
>   Having clean AIAs obviously helps bottom-up validators.  But 
> validators capable of bottom-up traversal must already defend against 
> AIA-wild-goose-chase DoS, e.g. by limiting chase depth.  Should we 
> encourage validators to enforce AIA correctness?

as i hope i made clear in taipei, i can see no reason to tolerate
useless incorrectness

randy, proud to be a naggumite