Re: [sidr] new agenda uploaded

Declan Ma <madi@zdns.cn> Thu, 05 November 2015 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <madi@zdns.cn>
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 4D2D11B3044 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 08:29:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.151
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.151 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 R8G9EJlZULBh for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 08:29:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.zdns.cn (smtp.knet.cn [202.173.10.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EB7FB1B3042 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 08:29:14 -0800 (PST)
X-TM-DID: bd3e532f4a2505b4f295f5858a0ef20a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.1 \(3096.5\))
From: Declan Ma <madi@zdns.cn>
In-Reply-To: <563B74CB.5030509@bbn.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 00:26:36 +0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CDB1164E-9F4D-4009-A3A5-22FD4533A9C8@zdns.cn>
References: <FE8E52D4-B754-42E0-9436-6FC7C507527D@tislabs.com> <D14CF57C-CDF6-4D6C-8452-802420DEE203@juniper.net> <5B354B9E-C4A5-4C99-823C-8CF156F980D2@tislabs.com> <563B74CB.5030509@bbn.com>
To: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3096.5)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/Lsx8QLSkPIOwLugeBCfVXKu1YOE>
Cc: sidr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sidr] new agenda uploaded
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: <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: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 16:29:17 -0000

I agree with Steve.

“RPKI Validation Reconsidered” should not be carried on.

And I believe that our WG should look at RPKI operation security from a wider perspective and pursue countermeasures according to a deliberate threat model as described in draft-kent-sidr-adverse-actions. 


Di Ma

ZDNS Ltd.


> 在 2015年11月5日,23:24,Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> 写道:
> 
> Sandy,
> 
> I think "draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered served a valuable purpose,
> highlighting valid concerns about potential fragility in the RPKI, in the face of
> errors by CAs and in the context of INR transfers. However, I feel that this I-D
> should not progress.
> 
> The topic of INR transfers is being addressed in much grater detail in
> draft-ymbk-sidr-transfer (which lists Geoff and George as co-authors). This doc.
> for which I provided extensive comments over the summer, is examining discussing
> INR transfers in a more thorough fashion and thus should provide a better basis for
> selecting a standard mechanism for their support.
> 
> The impact of errors by CAs is being examined in a much broader context in an I-D that
> Di Ma and I have authored: draft-kent-sidr-adverse-actions. This document examines
> a very wide range of impacts that can result from an error by a CA or an attack
> against a CA (or an error/attack involving a repository manager). Thus I feel that it
> will provide a more comprehensive analysis of the sort of concerns raised in
> validation-reconsidered.
> 
> Finally, the the validation algorithm change proposed in validation-reconsidered does
> not address the broader range of errors noted in adverse-actions. It also is not compatible
> with current RP software designs that validates CA (not just EE) certs as part of local cache
> maintenance.
> 
> Once the sidr-transfer and adverse-actions I-Ds are completed, I believe the WG
> will be a much better position to develop mechanisms that will address both sets
> of concerns noted above.
> 
> Steve
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr