IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sidr] WGLC for draft-ietf-sidr-pfx-validate-06

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Fri, 29 June 2012 13:51 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 3205321F86FE for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 06:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.584
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 IrwWJbpS48mT for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 06:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14D5B21F86CA for <sidr@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 06:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1SkbbK-000Cns-Fv; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:51:10 +0000
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 03:51:09 -1000
Message-ID: <m2vcia5ir6.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@ripe.net>
In-Reply-To: <A13B6A1C-188D-4EE3-A182-8F0CD7A1A0FF@ripe.net>
References: <24B20D14B2CD29478C8D5D6E9CBB29F625F1340A@Hermes.columbia.ads.sparta.com> <AFAF174A-F3D0-4D5C-A375-D7C8D283E5CE@ripe.net> <27839AC4-30E4-4C02-A64E-EAAC6F8B58D4@ripe.net> <FE0B25DE-6166-4A46-9435-3A58DAA51BC2@cisco.com> <A13B6A1C-188D-4EE3-A182-8F0CD7A1A0FF@ripe.net>
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] WGLC for draft-ietf-sidr-pfx-validate-06
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: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:51:13 -0000

> With inconsistencies I did not mean that the validated cache is out of date, which I agree, will always be there even if it could be minimised.
> 
> The inconsistencies I refer to are different in nature. It's that the snapshot that the RP tool got when it validated is in itself inconsistent: surplus or missing ROAs, or the hash of 1 or more ROAs doesn't match. Longer discussion omitted, but at this point the RP just doesn't know for certain what to do and guidance is needed. This is where *explicitly* stating a strong requirement, rather than leaving it implicit, in pfx-validate comes in..

would you like us to pull in the crucial paragraph from sec 6 of
origin-ops?

   Like the DNS, the global RPKI presents only a loosely consistent
   view, depending on timing, updating, fetching, etc.  Thus, one cache
   or router may have different data about a particular prefix than
   another cache or router.  There is no 'fix' for this, it is the
   nature of distributed data with distributed caches.

randy

v2.27.6 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status