Re: [sidr] WGLC for drained ft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-03

Sandy,

Yes I do believe the comments are satisfied,
Oliver

On 7/16/15 1:05 PM, "Sandra Murphy" <sandy@tislabs.com> wrote:

>Could you please reply to the list and say whether you believe that the
>draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-04.txt version satisfies your
>comments?  It would help with the process.
>
>--Sandy
>
>On Mar 25, 2015, at 5:13 PM, "Borchert, Oliver"
><oliver.borchert@nist.gov> wrote:
>
>> David,
>> 
>> A correction for my previous email, I mixed up session id and serial
>> number.
>> I think to keep it simple for version 0 - 1 switches and future
>>changes, a
>> change
>> Within the session id and version id should trigger a “Cache Reset” by
>>the
>> cache
>> And the client must resynch with the server.
>> And yes, wording in this matter might need to be added - but still it
>>also
>> could
>> Be an implementation issue.
>> 
>> Oliver
>> 
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> Oliver Borchert, Computer Scientist
>> National Institute of Standards and Technology
>> (Phone) 301.975.4856 , (Fax) 301.975.6238
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 3/24/15, 10:58 AM, "Borchert, Oliver" <oliver.borchert@nist.gov>
>>wrote:
>> 
>>> Isn¹t this an implementation issue? The client either speaks 0 or 1. As
>>> long as the server
>>> keeps track of the version for the session IMHO it does not matter if
>>>the
>>> session id is
>>> shared? The client doesn¹t know about it. Lets say one encounter a new
>>>key
>>> and this
>>> Only triggers a PDU 9, the server sends send out the notification. The
>>> client can but must not
>>> React to it anyhow. If the client reacts, the server sends an end of
>>> update to a version 0
>>> session and all pdu 9 updates to a version 1 session.
>>> I don¹t see a needed wording here. Not yet but IŒm open for
>>>enlightenment.
>>> 
>>> Oliver
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Oliver Borchert, Computer Scientist
>>> National Institute of Standards and Technology
>>> (Phone) 301.975.4856 , (Fax) 301.975.6238
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 3/24/15, 10:36 AM, "David Mandelberg" <david@mandelberg.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Rob and I were talking about rpki-rtr, and I came up with another
>>>> potential issue with switching between protocol versions. I don't see
>>>> any text about whether a single session (session id and serial
>>>>numbers)
>>>> can be used for both version 0 and 1. If a router has a valid version
>>>>0
>>>> session, upgrades to version 1, and issues a serial query with the
>>>>same
>>>> session id and serial number, it's unclear what the server should do.
>>>> Could we add text to the document saying that the cache MUST maintain
>>>>a
>>>> separate session for each protocol version it supports, and a router
>>>> MUST NOT attempt to reuse session information across multiple protocol
>>>> versions?
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> David Eric Mandelberg / dseomn
>>>> http://david.mandelberg.org/
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sidr mailing list
>>>> sidr@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sidr mailing list
>>> sidr@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> sidr mailing list
>> sidr@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>