Re: [sidr] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-08: (with COMMENT)

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Thu, 16 February 2017 00:29 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 C26BF129C1A; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:29:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 A0Qvr4AFTqUA; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:29:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EFAB129C13; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:29:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1ce9wN-00069f-Fe; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 00:28:55 +0000
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:28:53 +0900
Message-ID: <m237fff06y.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: "Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <148720232741.31605.15317084262605753406.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <148720232741.31605.15317084262605753406.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/sr2g5yB784IeuWwsgz3vOnSmSgs>
Cc: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis@ietf.org, Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>, sidr-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, sidr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sidr] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-08: (with COMMENT)
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: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 00:29:02 -0000

> - section 9: What's the background to removing the statement
> that one of TCP-AO ssh etc SHOULD be used? What is the reality
> of deployments here? I assume it is not TCP-AO anyway but does
> TLS or SSH get used?

TCP-AO never maaterialized.

off-hand, i can not think of a way to measure who is using what, but i
have this horrible suspicion it's all "it's all inside our domain of
control, so let's just run nekkid."

> - various places: I think 6810 was correct in using "that" and
> not "which" in many places. I realise that's a fairly frequent
> style thing that gets toggled though, but I bet the RFC editor
> sets a load of those back to "that" :-)

chicago style.  the rfced and we amuse ourselves over that one.  which
is why rfced gets the big bucks.

randy