Re: [Sidrops] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-egress-01

[Randy Bush <[e-mail]>]

> I only partially agree. For three reasons:
> 
> - My experience over the last 12 months of running invalid==deny in
> production is that some implementors have managed to take every
> ambiguity in the various rov-related RFCs and translate it into bugs or
> fragile/hostile behavior. I think our lesson should be that even
> obvious-seeming spec gaps ought to be filled in this area.
> 
> - Operators using implementations of this draft will observe
> behavioural differences between similar-seeming policy applied at
> different attachment points. This document should help them understand
> those differences.
> 
> - We may very well see some implementations wind up with separate
> policy knobs for "enable rpki-rov" and "enable rpki-rov-egress". Again,
> operators will need a spec against which to validate that feature
> behaviour if it is claiming RFC compliance.
> ...
> I'm not suggesting turning this into a use-case doc. But enough color
> to make the mental link between real-world policy and protocol concepts
> is necessary, imho.

since we're not getting it clearly, so send a short paragraph or two

randy