Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz

Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> Thu, 08 September 2016 15:41 UTC

Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@gmail.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 54ABE12B1B5 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 08:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 XsIxEw12qj64 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 08:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22a.google.com (mail-qt0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::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 A106012B4B4 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 08:36:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id l91so8211676qte.3 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Thu, 08 Sep 2016 08:36:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=xa/kipwTCl5fXxHWuqkVPMnM1cpJTKoFNs3cuJ/W3Ow=; b=1Hxy9gqsvzvc+rpuBE8Cng4zyg+qC0M6c+Vtx6vSC+P9yqAzbXkyFpbYnHjA3C2k6W RmI+zXA4LCPKA1jKniBOuzXbfbSpSIrMLREC8LSnCq8MMZhHlDgH7rusrpZO/4BHWcR7 tlGlL2qARpjeH/DbtMePteXnVkHXnZP+eiOBA2Zs2va9j/78ABG2vZiIadtlIcbinR+a Qwq3C+9ti4hS2ErUZBcnjCxLQEdNBOCeBczjg21rd3fk1iBm1/cZ/rxElbVHOVDMsLBc DZBQGtZoKKIr/66mihQRDSKhM4SWpP/jy2+0kTmGNzZAUSbVlRFWK15Nc71bx39Y7uJD PPhQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xa/kipwTCl5fXxHWuqkVPMnM1cpJTKoFNs3cuJ/W3Ow=; b=MQ0VuElngDgxNSUhLBcLiv2Vve+W1MmQ4mDQ7IwFTlLM1RT4J+uqxsLSqQVgF4O/pr Eb9HJ7hAkZepUvYcQ50xSoDDOqqW82TOUG79M1ML1+QeetkSxGJ8PHHNY0AZrB1jcH9T V/bp5vPXFRPfPXfqmOpsjPmDO3fqOB7A+FCvyAhHWwqJy3soD8iB6XgR+RKQ03rL7tev 9VCEfMsLehVtBTXwlK/xTHNm/U7Zb8i1O1qPKDxtYso4+fh+j+AtiPwMLkiREU80Xdna e7okWOKYNA+T0jOAYcXWjITzFp15Fy4zhvGcV5sgtdEiM2GQQRQFg7UbC84uqByOLzJy eJxw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwMx8Mf9YqdIx0shzFSawUKBuZdaTrLgeNUsEPQldRmvz2d90AT6+3898YoTZUBan2vhFCDZAG/tHDCQqQ==
X-Received: by 10.237.42.165 with SMTP id t34mr345456qtd.106.1473349016762; Thu, 08 Sep 2016 08:36:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.85.116 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 08:36:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <3F99CEBE-90B9-46F9-92CE-3E773933A760@shrubbery.net>
References: <yj9ooa46aumt.wl%morrowc@ops-netman.net> <AAE3F119-98A3-4618-BBFB-76F921316BD1@gmail.com> <349cb6ac-f4fe-29e5-b01f-3223b14e47de@gmail.com> <m2shteszs3.wl-randy@psg.com> <0a66024b-5cae-1abb-dc53-b11c1e35cdeb@bbn.com> <20160906220000.F1005420823A@minas-ithil.hactrn.net> <CAL9jLaYLJ2_1Dj9BtpQBa+Ta+BrGdvNpHHfFgrRxQ6SVo-6RXw@mail.gmail.com> <20160907040720.769594208DBB@minas-ithil.hactrn.net> <CAL9jLabwQQzigJF1=36dY7uWVcHSBKBmRC8DLd4pv1F1i0PZJg@mail.gmail.com> <BBA42462-C8AF-4C78-973B-3C475A9970D6@ripe.net> <CAL9jLaZ5tPtg0D1gWvURv=CXRdzWud5C+FWv4WUHeW6v2BLzvw@mail.gmail.com> <m237lax2g7.wl-randy@psg.com> <3F99CEBE-90B9-46F9-92CE-3E773933A760@shrubbery.net>
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 11:36:56 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ctSBZW6SBQGkj4n1RfV9ZMKVpbU
Message-ID: <CAL9jLaamc2o7C8Lw3ZMzCUD-=F74bkyTSRCH-fA3xq5dve6eLg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c06a3b0c64072053c00cca5
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/MRgK6HZQ47kGjc9JUZVlq_x36q4>
Cc: sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz
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: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 15:41:28 -0000

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Heasley <heas@shrubbery.net> wrote:

>
>
> Am 08.09.2016 um 00:42 schrieb Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>om>:
>
> >> Or maybe there's pushback that says: "Hey, I hear what you all in the
> >> rir want, but it's not cool, please please let's dive back into the
> >> politics stream and see how we get movement on what we all (probably?)
> >> want: a single root for this system."
>
> Or can the RIRs be removed from the equation? Why must we care what the
> RiRs want (fitting of many questions surrounding the RIRs)? Theyre
> essentially just agents of the IANA, its not inconceivable to replace them
> or separate duties.
>
>
sure... I think sriram may cover this in his document about the decision
processes which lead to where we are today.

I think, one way to look at the document and situation is this:
  o community folks for each RIR asked for RPKI to be supported
  o RIR folk put in some development $$/effort to do that
  o no single-root came forward
  o to make the RPKI work, specifically for xfers, or one way wrt
transfers, is to fake the root at each RIR.
  o rpki progress can still be made until single-root arrives, and then
some re-signing and probably rough work would have to happen to move under
the single-root.

sure lots of evil other things could be afoot, but I don't see evidence of
that.

again, perhaps it's worth the community folks (outside the ietf) just
saying:
  "I hear what you're saying, I like your want to keep this going forward,
but REALLY we need to sort out the issues around 'single-root' and get that
done.. the operational cost to not having a 'single-root' is just too
damned high."

<https://imgflip.com/i/1a8y83>


> >
> > the iab did that and got a written agreement that the rirs would do so.
> > nothing more is needed other than action.


apologies for not being up on the chain-of-command, but this doesn't seem
like it's enough... we've been waiting, what are the blockers? why can't
this action move forward? (yes, politics, let's move that to anyother list
I  suppose)

-chris