Re: [sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-origin-ops

Randy Bush <> Mon, 18 June 2012 02:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39C0721F857F for <>; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:47:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.576
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.576 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7xi-P5zShJ88 for <>; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:47:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF53021F857D for <>; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <>) id 1SgS0L-0000tq-Oy; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 02:47:50 +0000
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 11:47:48 +0900
Message-ID: <>
From: Randy Bush <>
To: Shane Amante <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
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 list <>
Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-origin-ops
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 02:47:59 -0000


going through the mailbox to pick up any un-addressed issues, i came
across your comment

> what I've been attempting to ask here is how one configures, in one's
> _local_ RPKI cache (that syncs to the outside world), /where/ the
> RIR's publication points are on Day 1.  Do I contact one RIR (which
> maintains a list of other RIR's publication points) -or- each RIR
> individually to ask what is their publication point?  (If you can help
> provide an answer as to what is the expectation on the operator, I can
> then potentially help to provide text).

i think there are a number of issues here

  o the general issue of how one gets trusted trust anchor(s),
    presumably out of band.  this problem is not unique to the rpki, so
    maybe we can get some help/clue here from the four or five steves in
    the group.

  o i do not see a reason to trust TAs shipped with software any more
    than TAs from any other random source.

  o one hopes that the current pathetic joke of having five RIR TAs will
    pass.  there is a long history of failing to really 'solve' a layer
    nine cf at layers seven and below.

  o the answer "iana will publish the root ta and sign it with their pgp
    key" may be a bit too glib because ...

  o we have an analogous problem for the operator who wants to use the
    global rpki, an lta rpki, and a private ta for 1918 or whatever.
    especially if the lta is built by a third party.

but i think that all this bs boils down to how to distribute a TA out of
band.  all pkis have this problem, dnssec has this problem, ...  i would
love to hear from the steves on this.