Subject: Re: [sidr] wglc for draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions-00
From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
To: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>, Sandra Murphy <[email-masked]>
Cc: sidr wg list <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 13:42:11 -0400
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>

Here is the revised text for the relevant part of the intro.

I don't see a need to change the text in the specific attack 
descriptions, given this revised intro text.

    Additionally, when a ROA or router certificate is created that

"competes" with an existing ROA or router certificate (respectively),

the creation of the new ROA or router certificatemay be adverse.

(A newer ROA competes with an older ROA if the newer ROA points to a

different ASN, contains the same or a more specific prefix, and is

issued by a different CA.A newer router certificate competes with

an older router certificate if the newer one contains the same ASN

a different public key, and is issued by a different CA.) Note that

transferring resources, or changing of upstream providers may yield

competing ROAs and/or router certificates, under some circumstances.

Thus not all instances of competition are adverse actions.

Steve