Re: [Sidrops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidrops-prefer-rrdp-00.txt

Dear working group,

I have asked for 15 minutes on this subject at the upcoming WG session.

Differences in this version:
- rename 'deprecate-rsync' -> 'prefer-rrdp' - as this is the first goal (phases 0-1-2)
- discuss deprecate rsync as a post-phase-2 goal
- start discussion of what would be needed to have transport agnostic names (no rsync in uris)
- moved implementation status overview to the end

Regards,
Tim

> On 23 Feb 2021, at 00:45, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the SIDR Operations WG of the IETF.
> 
>        Title           : Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Repository Requirements
>        Authors         : Tim Bruijnzeels
>                          Randy Bush
>                          George Michaelson
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-sidrops-prefer-rrdp-00.txt
> 	Pages           : 13
> 	Date            : 2021-02-22
> 
> Abstract:
>   This document formulates a plan of a phased transition to a state
>   where RPKI repositories and Relying Party software performing RPKI
>   Validation will use the RPKI Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP)
>   [RFC8182] as the only mandatory to implement access protocol.
> 
>   The first objective is to make RRDP the preferred access protocol,
>   and require rsync as a fallback option only.  This will greatly
>   reduce the operational burden and concerns for RPKI repository
>   operators.
> 
>   In phase 0, today's deployment, RRDP is supported by most, but not
>   all Repositories, and most but not all RP software.
> 
>   In the proposed phase 1 RRDP will become mandatory to implement for
>   Repositories, in addition to rsync.  This phase can start as soon as
>   this document is published.
> 
>   Once the proposed updates are implemented by all Repositories phase 2
>   will start.  In this phase RRDP will become mandatory to implement
>   for all RP software, and rsync will be required as a fallback option
>   only.
> 
>   It should be noted that although this document currently includes
>   descriptions and updates to RFCs for each of these phases, we may
>   find that it will be beneficial to have one or more separate
>   documents for these phases, so that it might be more clear to all
>   when the updates to RFCs take effect.
> 
>   Furthermore, this document currently includes an early discussion of
>   a future objective, which would be to change the RPKI standards such
>   that names in RPKI objects are no longer tightly coupled to rsync.
>   By using transport independent names and validation, we will obtain
>   the agility needed to phase out rsync altogether and/or introduce
>   other future access protocols.
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidrops-prefer-rrdp/
> 
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-prefer-rrdp-00
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-prefer-rrdp-00
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sidrops mailing list
> Sidrops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops