Re: [sidr] wglc for draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions-00

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Tue, 05 July 2016 17:45 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 7E6B012B060 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:45:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 slleMihidFgd for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:45:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC58912D12B for <sidr@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:45:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1bKUP9-0003yx-8c; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 17:45:03 +0000
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 02:45:01 +0900
Message-ID: <m2furo6kte.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Sandra Murphy <sandy@tislabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <F3FB0B9E-A069-4381-9D37-305C4C96A1F8@tislabs.com>
References: <8E32FD39-FD20-455C-8BEC-5752DE9C8531@tislabs.com> <m2wpl6ffdp.wl%randy@psg.com> <8196148a-b98d-c680-c714-55498131e7ce@bbn.com> <m28txldluq.wl%randy@psg.com> <F3FB0B9E-A069-4381-9D37-305C4C96A1F8@tislabs.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/i-vmDz03W0xYMAjiA1vgsk2kPJs>
Cc: sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] wglc for draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions-00
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: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 17:45:07 -0000

> I don’t see that there’s a requirement that a router have only one
> certificate, either.  A router that was configured to speak as two
> different ASs might have one key certified by both ASs and might have
> two different keys, one for each AS.

that this is designed in is not an accident.  we had this discussion,
just as we had the multi-roa discussion; but they are ops complexity, so
easly ignored/forgotten.

randy