Re: [Sidrops] trying to limit RP processing variability

Di Ma <> Fri, 10 April 2020 05:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 628DE3A1EE7 for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 22:09:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o35STA7J8Psi for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 22:09:18 -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 0E3B83A1EE0 for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 22:09:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=CONTINUE; BC=0.4835023|-1; CH=green; DM=|CONTINUE|false|; DS=CONTINUE|ham_system_inform|0.302309-0.000775527-0.696916; FP=0|0|0|0|0|-1|-1|-1; HT=e02c03300;; NM=1; PH=DS; RN=3; RT=3; SR=0; TI=SMTPD_---.HDzGa1Z_1586495350;
Received: from fp:SMTPD_---.HDzGa1Z_1586495350) by; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 13:09:11 +0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
From: Di Ma <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 13:09:07 +0800
Cc: Robert Kisteleki <>, "" <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
To: Stephen Kent <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] trying to limit RP processing variability
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: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 05:09:20 -0000

>> The downside is that this process
>> will not be able to point out the omission. The upside is saves a lot of
>> resources (bandwidth, CPU and all). A further upside is that as a
>> side-effect this protects against a malicious attacker (selectively)
>> hiding objects.
> If the only things that changed in the manifest were the updates and manifest number, then there would be no need to retrieve any additional objects, and with rsync I don't believe there would be any other file retrievals. I can't be sure, but I think thge BBN RPSTIR software behaved that way.  Do we get bonus points?


<On behalf of RPSTIR open source team>

RPSTIR doesn’t retrieve any additional objects by using rsync to keep synchronized with repositories.

However, how to deal with those downloaded objects (use/ignore/warn) depends on how we cope with MFT, CRL and local analysis.