Re: [Sidrops] [WGLC] draft-ietf-sidrops-rp - ENDS: Mar 7, 2019

[Stephen Kent <[e-mail]>]

Oleg & Di Ma,

Sorry I missed the use of normative language in my earlier review of 
this doc.
>
>>> 4.2.3.  Ghostbusters
>>>
>>>
>>>    The Ghostbusters Record is optional; a publication point in the RPKI
>>>    can have zero or more associated Ghostbuster Records.
>>
>> Since no other CMS object description in this document mentions object’s optionality, this sentence may be understood as that the Ghostbusters Record is the only type of object which is optional. This is not the case.
> We haven’t thought of this implication.
>
> Thanks for your consideration.
I believe that all of the other RPKI signed objects are intended as 
mandatory for applicable entities (e.g., TAs, CAs, or EEs).  There are 
some fields in those objects that are optional, but not the objects 
themselves. The GB object is purely optional, so the cited statement 
seems apporpriate.
> Since you and I can neither know how other RP software would behave in 
> terms of this issue.
> How about crossing out 'However, most RP software ignores such objects and this document recommends that this behavior be adopted uniformly.’

To avoid what might be construed as standards-like language, how about:

"... this document recommends that..." -> "... the authors of this document suggest that ..."

> You are touching the key point.
>
> We authors were bothered  by RFC 6486 which is squishy in how RPs would use Manifest, but find it hard to improve it.
>
> That’s why we tried to go into detail of this issue instead of just referring to Section 6 of RFC 6486 but leave TBD in early version.
>
> If the WG has no more better idea, we authors will consider to adjust this section regarding 'How to Make Use of Manifest Data’ .

As Di notes, the language in 6486 is thus very squishy, because it's 
hard to decide, in general, whether a hard-line approach to Mainfest 
info may be more helpful than harmful. I think a discussion of the pros 
and cons of using Manifest data can be useful, but it also must be 
carefully worded.

Steve