[Sidrops] Re: Mahesh Jethanandani's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-crl-numbers-04: (with COMMENT)

[Mahesh Jethanandani <[e-mail]>]

Hi Theo,

> On May 19, 2025, at 9:35 PM, Theo Buehler <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>>>      |  Per Section 5.2.3 of [RFC5280], CAs issue new CRLs using a
>>>      |  monotonically increasing sequence number in the "CRL Number"
>>>      |  extension.  It is RECOMMENDED that the "CRL Number" matches the
>>>      |  "manifestNumber" of the manifest that will include this CRL
>>>      |  (see Section 4.2.1 of [RFC9286]).
>> 
>> Maybe this is covered somewhere else, but reading the last sentence of the NEW
>> I wonder what happens when the CRL Number does NOT match the manifestNumber. Is
>> the session aborted? Does it fall back to previous behavior, i.e., checking the
>> highest value of CRL Number. Some clarity would help.
> 
> The I-D specifies that the crlNumber be ignored. Checking whether it
> matches the manifestNumber or not is not ignoring it :)

I think Deb had a similar comment …

The draft says “It is RECOMMENDED” that the ‘CRL Number’ matches the ‘manifestNumber’. The question was, what happens when “CRL Number” does not match the “manifestNumber”?

Mahesh Jethanandani
[e-mail]