Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update

Christopher Morrow <> Thu, 22 April 2021 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 117F53A100A for <>; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 66y0xzQbcgLU for <>; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 697263A1007 for <>; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id v7so19088195qkj.13 for <>; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gao6ApF9XtPU5BY1ZQr4l9eHBQPWvhcmSymWOlX/zsI=; b=Vks8fqIDpgCYCQY7yBQWodPPpXiEC8H/N8Z7WPQRiJckwbsAvRVd0X+nTVaEXzZBPD 03oP5mo3fj3apoSGaRS4aqeQPqk2VM0gzkHkKk5Dq7LPiJ2OE6m5GGEDzShth5J5UiHE rY3YUJqXCdg4evyT6/PJf5Z/BpQcrVerCFWZDmK2eDoSHmiSKZPC7MVMc/lCwf+Mj/UJ p4uFNHG9knjrVb45GhcVcfUBKySRKFvNNFzujow1qL8dmOOQI6zgHKmQeA9RQad/T3lu gnTFQ4fzBkuAirV0lVxg2jdZGb2sGnfePz7fJWQc11OoUGTpYyW6Wm1k2D2z1SbLd3Zg wM7Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gao6ApF9XtPU5BY1ZQr4l9eHBQPWvhcmSymWOlX/zsI=; b=V1FL9quQINGPhnwhy3MBzHCIXZNdOT/QA7EM+EblILMxzXQsRyUjI5sXYi3PLLQZBq olESbHjugnB6hC8cdyt/5NH7CWADalUgrEcl8JnusFkKaHOKnkcxfG2SUacYLet7rJoX GKao3JWFH8Y04vy94Yzz4o+U85Ja1As5RyLTOyrM/xXtu10aarb/saPkVC101MUeg1Z+ hzgwWYZV0gotSWwcBTecmNzuO6lrXbbyB7lft300pqWLR7wsObX2geTIEbsOtBNlMatg Y7dy/d5MjFXfZg0vDaHHJC3M7HXbWSkeLyvMwBR9NGjZj94PMNCsTu4wGOqQnbpl/ejR GZXA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532/gF8vmz/WA8jSdsJzSU56yrqap09fxKEeZ+WvI+pTTgTIQu5y 4HaR6Vdcd3ebZ+/vYUsC6K5559q72Nzp7uQ2YCsEwwRvgs0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyQu5+axB976jVQfZgoDZukPtHSn4NDnzGQI+uy0hElFHwlF3QGLiGGtl0PmNillzpy30Cx1HJ8PwZPaF1/+rQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a78d:: with SMTP id q135mr4810748qke.210.1619113588322; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <YEjILk/5hwwX/x9P@snel> <> <YEjrr9IKijX1+5We@snel> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Christopher Morrow <>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 13:46:17 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: Randy Bush <>
Cc: Job Snijders <>, SIDR Operations WG <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000048747305c09342d1"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] request for call for Working Group adoption draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 17:46:37 -0000

Not a lot of follow on this... (well, public follow up)

So, I propose this course of action:
  1) this document serves as a 'requirement (and possible solution)' that
sidrops used to identify a problem
  2) send this along as a query/question to the protocol group (IDR) with a
request to:
     a) say: "go forth, this change seems ok, it's small and such"
     b) say: "Good googley-moogley! what are you crazypants people on
about?? of COURSE this needs to be reviewed... please have AD-foobar spin
up SIDR to properly handle this!! TUT-TUT! How cloud you conceive of a
world other than this!!"

      and answer back in 2wks time, one fort-night! and two farthings! (or
something, farthings are metric)

provided no one screams at me about this WHILE I WRITE THE NEXT EMAIL.. we
can send an adoption call/etc in 2wks time OR jump back into our SIDR
pantsuit and get to the business of business.


On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 6:45 PM Christopher Morrow <> wrote:

> it seems to me this could be framed as:
>   "Hey, this problem with the protocol is a problem, it's raising problems
> for operations
>     of the systems involved. Let's get the size/shape of the problem
> figured out and get
>     some requirements for a change together to have the SIDR WG fix this
> protocol problem"
> that might be hard with SIDR gone, but there are a bunch of ex-SIDR now
> SIDROPS folks in
> SIDROPS who can say:
>   "ok, this seems insane, run fast in the opposite direction!!"
> or:
>   "Err, this isn't horrible, maybe this is easy to just fix in a proposal
> here?"
> -chris
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 1:12 PM Randy Bush <> wrote:
>> >>> I'd like to request the chairs to consider initiating a call for
>> >>> working group adoption of
>> draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-validation-update
>> >>
>> >> this is a protocol change and a serious one, and hence does not belong
>> >> in an ops group
>> >
>> > There is ongoing operational problem
>> most protocol problems cause operational problems.  it is a measure of
>> their severity.
>> randy
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sidrops mailing list