Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
In-Reply-To: <C570AE8F-A764-43ED-B273-005DABBDC836@ripe.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:00:34 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <793C1123-0398-455C-A316-A2DADB1F400A@sn3rd.com>
References: <20160708091943.32156.30842.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
 <C570AE8F-A764-43ED-B273-005DABBDC836@ripe.net>
To: Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@ripe.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/a_gs_UDmXfdGdOsnLoAd7wzXOo0>
Cc: sidr <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] I-D Action:
 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-06.txt
Precedence: list


> On Jul 08, 2016, at 05:35, Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@ripe.net> wrote:
>=20
> Stephen Kent comment on -04 of this document saying that it should not =
attempt to update the BGPSec Router Certificate I-D because it's not an =
RFC, just yet. It's currently in IESG Processing. The current document =
therefore has a request and some suggestion to the authors to change the =
document (in which case the section can be deleted in the next =
(hopefully final) version of this document.
>=20
> I don't mind either way. Maybe the chairs have an idea about what the =
best process is. But in either case we would like to ask the BGPSec =
Router Certificate authors to review the included text.

Tim,

Just so I=E2=80=99m following along:

- This draft replaces the text in RFC 6487 s7.2 so should =
rpki-validation-reconsidered draft include the =E2=80=9CUpdates: 6487 =
(if approved)=E2=80=9D header?  My understanding is that the proposal is =
that all RPKI validators follow these new steps so that would make sense =
process wise.

- bgpsec-pki-profiles s3.3 currently refers to RFC 6487 s7 for =
validation procedures and technically if rpki-validation-reconsidered =
updates RFC 6487 when bgpsec-pki-profiles refers to RFC 6487 it includes =
those references so I wouldn=E2=80=99t necessarily have to add a =
explicit reference to rpki-validation-reconsidered =E2=80=A6 but people =
will forget this and miss the update and I know Wes hates chasing =
references ;)  So, to drive this point home we could do the following =
tweak in addition to adding your suggested bullet and =
separate-certificate per ASN suggestion:

OLD:

  The validation procedure used for BGPsec Router Certificates is
  identical to the validation procedure described in Section 7 of
  [RFC6487], but using the constraints applied come from this
  specification.

NEW:

  The validation procedure used for BGPsec Router Certificates is
  identical to the validation procedure described in Section 7 of
  [ID.sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered], but using the constraints
  applied come from this specification.

Note I=E2=80=99d probably also add ID.idr-rpki-validation-reconsidered =
to the required reading list in the terminology section :/

spt=