Hi, here are some comments/questions regarding the draft:
o Section 4, p7 Typo: s/(i.e. and end user could deploy SEND without the need of RPKI deployment in its ISP)/(i.e. an end user could deploy SEND without the need of RPKI deployment in its ISP) "This model MAY include ULA addresses." I would add a reference to the RFC 4193. o Section 5.1, p8 IMHO, it should be clearer: s/"This certificate will be obtained from the publication point of certificate defined as trust anchor."/"This certificate will be obtained from the publication point of the trust anchor certificate." BTW, as you used "EE" term at the beginning of the section, why not to use the rest of the terminology specified in [draft-ietf-sidr-ta-02] (i.e. ETA, RTA)? "The identification for the Trust Anchor Material will be included in the Name Type Field of the ICMP Trust Anchor Option as decribed in RFC 3971 and MUST always to refer to a certificate that includes as RFC 3779 address extension." s/as decribed in RFC 3971/as described in RFC 3971 What do you mean by "MUST always to refer to a certificate that includes as RFC 3779 address extension."? Because, as far as I understood the RPKI structure [draft-ietf-sidr-ta-02], normally, the device validating the router's EE cert has only an ETA cert which doesn't contain a RFC 3779 Address Extension (this last one refers to a RTA which contains a RFC 3779 Address Extension). Am I correct? Thanks in advance for your reply. Best regards. JMC. _______________________________________________ CGA-EXT mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cga-ext
