Hi All,
I see this erratum went to sidr@ but not sidrops@. I suspect there is
considerable overlap between the two lists, but just in case, I thought I’d add
sidrops before any disposition is decided for the erratum. The discussion so
far is at
In response to Russ:
On Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 10:20:54AM -0500, Russ Housley wrote:
> RFC 5280 defines the SAI extension, and it says:
>
>This profile defines one access method to be used when the subject is
>a CA and one access method to be used when the subject is an end
>entity.
RFC 5280 defines the SAI extension, and it says:
This profile defines one access method to be used when the subject is
a CA and one access method to be used when the subject is an end
entity. Additional access methods may be defined in the future in
the protocol specifications for
On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 04:38:12AM -0700, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8182,
> "The RPKI Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP)".
>
> --
> You may review the report below and at:
>
Hi,
I agree with this report.
The clarification should have been included. CA certificates were intended -
RPKI object retrieval is irrelevant in the context of the EE certificates in
RPKI signed objects. And as Job pointed out the addition of the access
description would not be allowed
I agree that the proposed errata would be a good clarification.
Thanks,
Bryan
> On Dec 7, 2022, at 12:22 AM, Tom Harrison wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 04:38:12AM -0700, RFC Errata System wrote:
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8182,
>> "The RPKI Repository Delta
On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 04:38:12AM -0700, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8182,
> "The RPKI Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP)".
>
> --
> You may review the report below and at:
>
