Re: [Sidrops] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity-05: (with COMMENT)

[Randy Bush <[e-mail]>]

hi murray,

thanks for the review

> BCP doesn't seem appropriate, but I wish there was a stronger document
> status we could give this.

the whack-a-mole stream?  :)

all in all, it's sad that this document is needed.  but it has been
shown to be.

>    If it tried to do so, aside from the liability, it would end in a
>    world of complexity with no proof of termination, as X.400 learned.
> 
> Is there a reference describing the X.400 lesson that could be
> included here?

i am not aware of a good cite for the 1992 kobe meeting </ dripping
sarcasm>

but, i take your point.  a knowledge of history is required.  might be
easiest to drop the ref to X.400.  whatcha think?

and i suspect that non-cs folk will not get 'proof of termination'.
hmmm.

>    Registries such as the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) provide
>    INR to real-world identity mapping through whois and similar
>    services.  They claim to be authoritative, at least for the INRs
>    which they allocate.
> 
> I think "WHOIS" is properly (or at least traditionally) in all-caps.

i am inclined to lean on the rfced more than seems to be the current
fashion in the iesg.  how about

   Registries such as the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) provide
   INR to real-world identity mapping through WHOIS, [RFC3912], and
   similar services.  They claim to be authoritative, at least for the
   INRs which they allocate.

thanks again.

randy