IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sidrops] what to do when the CRL is hosed?

Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> Wed, 26 February 2020 05:53 UTC

Return-Path: <jared@puck.nether.net>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133AC3A0DF9 for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:53:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=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 pF7tlWvZlBRL for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:53:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from puck.nether.net (puck.nether.net [204.42.254.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A6E73A0A59 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:53:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.0.155] (c-68-32-79-179.hsd1.mi.comcast.net [68.32.79.179]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by puck.nether.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 67E8654016E; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:53:35 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <CANw9378e0VVPZXjjtktm-eUBxe1sPeK-69CyLWXLHocL3Ws-=g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:53:34 -0500
Cc: sidrops@ietf.org
Message-Id: <FE0F6E3C-2F39-4F8B-AE2B-4C0DB485C3A3@puck.nether.net>
References: <CANw9378e0VVPZXjjtktm-eUBxe1sPeK-69CyLWXLHocL3Ws-=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Louis Poinsignon <louis.poinsignon@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17D50)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/30bOfrfKzBCmaZ81mH8GYkQwVAo>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] what to do when the CRL is hosed?
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 05:53:38 -0000

I get the intent here but 24h is too short. If there is a hardware failure on a holiday weekend or natural disaster it may take too long to recover ones systems. 

In the event of some global pandemic I could even envision it taking longer for small operators. 

Sent from my iCar

> On Feb 25, 2020, at 9:02 PM, Louis Poinsignon <louis.poinsignon@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Why not reducing the maximum validity of certificates to one day?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email