[Sidrops] [WG ADOPTION] rfc-8211-bis - Ends 2020-28-08 (Aug 28 2020)

Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net> Tue, 11 August 2020 17:01 UTC

Return-Path: <morrowc@ops-netman.net>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A23F3A0826; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 10:01:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, TVD_PH_BODY_ACCOUNTS_PRE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8RLRY0moS75d; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 10:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.ops-netman.net (relay.ops-netman.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83A093A0814; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 10:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.ops-netman.net (mailserver.ops-netman.net []) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by relay.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DBEA3C21AB; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 17:01:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mailserver.ops-netman.net.ops-netman.net (localhost []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ops-netman.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E67E2236; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 17:01:29 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 17:01:29 +0000
Message-ID: <87tux9xgk6.wl-morrowc@ops-netman.net>
From: Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>
To: sidrops@ietf.org, sidrops-chairs@ietf.org, sidrops-ads@ietf.org
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/25.2 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Organization: Operations Network Management, Ltd.
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/sidrops/AXlI0behsbML3J_Bzv7NiOjOcl4>
Subject: [Sidrops] [WG ADOPTION] rfc-8211-bis - Ends 2020-28-08 (Aug 28 2020)
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: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 17:01:33 -0000

Howdy WG Folks!
The authors of RFC8211 have prepared an update to their document:

The abstract being:
  " This document analyzes actions by or against a Certification
   Authority (CA) or an independent repository manager in the RPKI that
   can adversely affect the Internet Number Resources (INRs) associated
   with that CA or its subordinate CAs.  The analysis is done from the
   perspective of an affected INR holder.  The analysis is based on
   examination of the data items in the RPKI repository, as controlled
   by a CA (or an independent repository manager) and fetched by Relying
   Parties (RPs).  The analysis does not purport to be comprehensive; it
   does represent an orderly way to analyze a number of ways that errors
   by or attacks against a CA or repository manager can affect the RPKI
   and routing decisions based on RPKI data."

the updates are meant to take into account the updated language in the
pending RFC6486-bis document. Let's have a read, decide if this should
be adopted by the WG for work/cleanup/refresh and have a decision back
to the list/authors as of 28/8/2020 - August 28 this year (2020).