Re: [sidr] agenda requests for the Berlin IETF 96 meeting

"Yu Fu" <> Tue, 12 July 2016 07:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 634C312D106 for <>; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.29
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rrht11NvuSDg for <>; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:25:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8346312B016 for <>; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:25:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LIUXD (unknown []) by (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf0A5QChim4RXGDUECg--.18530S3; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:25:23 +0800 (CST)
From: Yu Fu <>
References: <00d201d1db24$f89428e0$e9bc7aa0$@cn> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:25:26 +0800
Message-ID: <012e01d1dc0e$8fbd3650$af37a2f0$@cn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AdHbdlw0ymdiM2sQSEeKgAQ9T0ydKQAlvyQA
Content-Language: zh-cn
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvdXoW7Xr1xAr4DXr1kGw18KFykKrg_yoW3urg_Kr Z5trs2ka1UtF4UXrW3Kr4fJ3sa9F4jgryUC3s5Xr92934kAa9FgFsrKrnxZr4fA395Grn8 X395Xas2yF18ujkaLaAFLSUrUUUUUb8apTn2vfkv8UJUUUU8Yxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT 9fnUUIcSsGvfJTRUUUb28YjsxI4VWxJwAYFVCjjxCrM7AC8VAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1l1xkIjI8I 6I8E6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Wr0E3s1l1IIY67AEw4v_Jr0_Jr4l8cAvFVAK0II2c7xJM2 8CjxkF64kEwVA0rcxSw2x7M28EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVW8JVW5JwA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0 cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVW8JVWxJwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26F4UJVW0owA2z4x0Y4vEx4 A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_GcCE3s1le2I262IYc4CY6c8Ij28IcVAaY2xG8wAqx4xG64xvF2IE w4CE5I8CrVC2j2WlYx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMc vjeVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvY0x0EwIxGrwCY02Avz4vE14v_GF4l42xK82IY c2Ij64vIr41l4I8I3I0E4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1lx2IqxVAqx4xG67AKxVWUJVWUGwC20s 026x8GjcxK67AKxVWUGVWUWwC2zVAF1VAY17CE14v26r1Y6r17MIIYrxkI7VAKI48JMIIF 0xvE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0x vE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWrJr0_WFyUJwCI42IY6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwCI42IY6I8E 87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26r1j6r4UYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07jO73kUUUUU=
X-CM-SenderInfo: pix13q5fqqxugofq/
Archived-At: <>
Cc: 'sidr' <>, 'Sandra Murphy' <>
Subject: Re: [sidr] agenda requests for the Berlin IETF 96 meeting
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 07:25:34 -0000

Dear Carlos,

Thank you for your remind and comment.
I will update the description based on your comments in the next version.


On Monday, July 11, 2016 9:16 PM, Carlos M. Martinez
[] wrote:

>I'm concerned about the loose use of the term 'countries' here. For many
people this can mean 'governments' and, at least in the case in Ecuador, the
Government has nothing to do with this. RPKI deployment is not a
'national' initiative if by national we mean 'sponsored' or 'approved'
>by the current Government.

>A better way of describing the country-wide deployments could be something
along the lines of:

>"Various organizations in different countries like x,y and z have been
working on RPKI testing and deployment in some cases at a country-wide