[Sidrops] Interim Meeting Follow-up Mail

[Chris Morrow <[e-mail]>]

First, apologies for this being so tardy :(
Second, thanks for attending the interim on 10/01/2020 (Oct 1st) and
bearing with me/us in the conversation.

Now, at the end of the meeting (which I thought was 1hr in, but was
really 2hr in) I said I'd send out a mail to discuss two items:

  1) Being clear about impacts/repercussions related to the
     decision process being put forth for 6486bis:
       a) There will be repositories that disappear when they can't
          get their content straight at publication time.
	  
       b) Repeated failures at a CA/PublicationPoint(PP) will
          eventually lead to that CA/PP's routing intent falling back
	  to 'not found'.
	  
       c) In some circumstances (tim pointed these out I believe)
          if the CA/PP is a leaf below another CA/PP which publishes
	  ROA for covering routes, the leaf CA/PP's routing intent
	  may change to INVALID.
	  
	  ie: RIR -> LIR -> end-user
	    if the LIR publises 8.0.0.0/8 - AS64600
	    if the end-user publishes 8.8.0.0/16 AS64601
            if the end-user CA/PP expires
	      (for any reason, but specifically collection problems)
            the end-user prefixes will become invalid.

       d) There are some ordering/rollout/planning concerns related
          to new object types in the repository which either need
	  to be worked out in the bis OR noted and pushed to the next
	  new object proposal.
	  I think the authors are clear that: "for next proposal"
	  I think the meeting participants seemed split, but that at least:
	    "Hey, note that adding new objects will be different... pay attention!"
	  should end up in the bis document.

  2) Closing up the -bis conversation/document prior to december
     The current author set has an expiry timer, we can either finish up 'now'
     or hand-over reins at/after the F2F meeting + edit time.


I'd like to get some closure on these, ideally, before the f2f in ~3wks time.

-chris
co-chair-persona