Re: [Sidrops] Agenda for Virtual Interim Meeting 28 April 2020

Tim Bruijnzeels <> Sat, 25 April 2020 12:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12ED93A0BA1 for <>; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 05:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kWcvmiKmvWiA for <>; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 05:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60B813A0D12 for <>; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 05:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:981:4b52:1:3165:cea3:8571:183d] (unknown [IPv6:2001:981:4b52:1:3165:cea3:8571:183d]) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9AF741BCCC; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 14:38:10 +0200 (CEST)
Authentication-Results:; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none)
Authentication-Results:; spf=fail
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=default; t=1587818290; bh=ieJOo8RQ88s7Y7eV5X1NXzY4Tv2dn8p6TCuAKX/UKlI=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=UsIdPhdNHCuJVuGrvvYPC/Rh2GI6KmgsK6aO+SfF88UQKc0mbq0Gnv9vwICBZsxrT qeq7WUO9IiNl5Gi6Wbm4jRTT+umElWkfxpri78Gvu2pjDlruEjul+41vFq8kxhOdPY 9+joPUr1GYbR9mVLLbjPFvTkI8vssh5kcktzOZrM=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.\))
From: Tim Bruijnzeels <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 14:38:10 +0200
Cc: SIDR Operations WG <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Nathalie Trenaman <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] Agenda for Virtual Interim Meeting 28 April 2020
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 12:38:14 -0000


> On 24 Apr 2020, at 19:44, Nathalie Trenaman <> wrote:
> <snip />
> 4) Tim Bruijnzeels - [15 minutes]
> Deprecating rsync Draft

I just posted a new version of the document. Major changes:
- Randy Bush and George Michaelson became co-authors
- Phased plan is made much more concrete
- Includes suggested updates to RFCs for each phase

We may find it useful to separate the document into a plan, and implementation for each phase, but for now this can hopefully serve to have a structured discussion.

Slides will be sent to Nathalie and the co-chairs in time, I promise :)

Abstract if you don't feel like clicking the link:

   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.

   In short this plan consists of the following phases.

   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 must no longer be used.

   Measurements will need to be done to help determine when it will be
   safe to transition to the final phase of this plan.  During this
   phase Repositories will no longer be required to provide rsync access
   for RPKI validation purposes.  However, they may still provide rsync
   access for direct access to files for other purposes, if desired, at
   a best effort basis.

   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 separate documents for the plan, and each phase, so that it
   might be more clear to all when the updates to RFCs take effect.

> 5) Massimiliano Stucchi - [15 minutes]
> AS-Cones Draft
> Thanks,
> Nathalie 
> _______________________________________________
> Sidrops mailing list