IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sidrops] erratum

heasley <heas@shrubbery.net> Wed, 08 November 2023 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <heas@shrubbery.net>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01B4DC1522BD for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 13:37:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pp1Oqkjwxa0A for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 13:37:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sea.shrubbery.net (sea.shrubbery.net [129.250.47.99]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99219C1516EB for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 13:37:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by sea.shrubbery.net (Postfix, from userid 7053) id 25B933C82D8; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 21:36:59 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 21:36:59 +0000
From: heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: SIDR Operations WG <sidrops@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <ZUv_e1xfKT9FG-e-@shrubbery.net>
References: <m2sf5ggcfu.wl-randy@psg.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <m2sf5ggcfu.wl-randy@psg.com>
X-PGPkey: http://www.shrubbery.net/~heas/public-key.asc
X-note: live free, or die!
X-homer: i just want to have a beer while i am caring.
X-Claimation: an engineer needs a manager like a fish needs a bicycle
X-reality: only YOU can put an end to the embarrassment that is Tom Cruise
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/ZH34XSQdJTvUdp9bf33i_YVvPZU>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] erratum
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 21:37:02 -0000

Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 01:30:45PM -0800, Randy Bush:
> a friend may have caught an erratum
> 
> rfc7115
> 
>    Operators should be conservative in use of max length in ROAs.  For
>    example, if a prefix will have only a few sub-prefixes announced,
>    multiple ROAs for the specific announcements should be used as
>    opposed to one ROA with a long max length.
> 
> should that last "long" be a "short?"

long seems correct to me.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status