Re: [sidr] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-08: (with COMMENT)

Randy Bush <> Thu, 16 February 2017 01:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 130BC129C2C; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:05:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.902
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GjNGh4cp5wN2; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:05:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA959129C27; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:05:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <>) id 1ceAVJ-0006Lx-6x; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 01:05:01 +0000
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 10:04:57 +0900
Message-ID: <>
From: Randy Bush <>
To: Stephen Farrell <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <>
Cc:, Chris Morrow <>,, The IESG <>,
Subject: Re: [sidr] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-08: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 01:05:07 -0000

>>> - section 9: What's the background to removing the statement
>>> that one of TCP-AO ssh etc SHOULD be used? What is the reality
>>> of deployments here? I assume it is not TCP-AO anyway but does
>>> TLS or SSH get used?
>> TCP-AO never maaterialized.
>> off-hand, i can not think of a way to measure who is using what, but i
>> have this horrible suspicion it's all "it's all inside our domain of
>> control, so let's just run nekkid."
> Yeah that's the concern. If the answer was "seems mostly folks
> use ssh" (or tls, or ipsec, whatever), I'd have asked if we
> could get away with at least a SHOULD-use for that.
> Such encouragement would be good IMO, if it's non-fiction.

i hack routers and servers daily to keep from becoming a complete bs
artiste.  so of course i tried setting up and running each transport.
ssh was painful; key-based did not work for many platforms, ...  no AO
on any platform i could find.  no TLS client side support.  and there is
a special hell where you have to do a device-diverse deployment of ipsec
once a day ( smb has a student who did a good paper on this).

luckily, ipv6 comes with secure transport built in.  oh wait.

i fear we are in yet another case of security software is not easy to
use so we shift the blame to the user.  we've gotten good at that.

i think that all this is designed to make me happy to go back to hacking
on a paper in latex.