Re: [sidr] Simpler trust anchor format

Before I lend my support to either the simpler format or the current
compound TA format I'd like to see a pros/cons list comparing the two
approaches.

While I find myself liking simple approaches but I also wonder if it has any
downfalls in use.

Cheers
Terry

On 7/06/10 2:21 PM, "Samuel Weiler" <weiler@watson.org> wrote:

> I just submitted an i-d documenting a much simpler trust anchor format
> than the one in the current WG draft.  Like the format in the WG doc,
> this one allows for a long-lived trust anchor even though the unlying
> certificate changes more often, e.g. when new resources are added.
> This format has the advantage of being noticeably simpler.
> 
> I encourage the WG to adopt this format in place of the one in the
> current WG doc.
> 
> -- Sam
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Sun,  6 Jun 2010 19:30:02 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> Subject: I-D Action:draft-weiler-sidr-trust-anchor-format-00.txt
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> 
>         Title           : RPKI Trust Anchor Format
>         Author(s)       : S. Weiler
>         Filename        : draft-weiler-sidr-trust-anchor-format-00.txt
>         Pages           : 4
>         Date            : 2010-06-06
> 
> This document describes a simple convention for distributing trust
> anchors for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI).
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-weiler-sidr-trust-anchor-format-00.t
> xt
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
> Internet-Draft.
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr