Re: [sidr] WG LC for draft-ietf-sidr-ghostbusters-06.txt

Have read -06 and I think (generally) it is fine to progress with a tiny
personal nit.

I did wonder as I was reading the document if the object is optional or
mandatory in the repository structure? For example if I create a ROA, MUST I
create a Ghostbusters record. I can certainly see that for healthy NOC
operation, a Ghostbusters record is a really nice thing to have for allowing
others to contact you. Perhaps a sentence or two clarifying this.

This might also then help the relying parties in terms of their validation
workload. (not that the workload is high or anything) Can they happily
discard or delay the validation of the Ghostbusters record if the so choose?

Cheers
Terry

On 14/07/11 9:35 AM, "Sandra Murphy" <Sandra.Murphy@sparta.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> The chairs have received a request from the authors for a WG Last Call for
> "The RPKI Ghostbusters Record", draft-ietf-sidr-ghostbusters-06.
> 
> The document and the draft version history are available at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/sidr/draft-ietf-sidr-ghostbusters
> 
> The Last Call will end Wed, 3 Aug 2011 (AOE).  This is three weeks instead
> of the usual two, because the IETF week will occupy people's time and
> attention.
> 
> As usual, please address all comments to the WG mailing list, and please
> be clear in your comments to this last call if you are supporting the
> document's submission to the IESG or if you are opposed. If you are
> opposed, please indicate why.
> 
> --Sandy, speaking as wg chair, with wg chair snood on
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr