[sidr] new agenda uploaded; all slides received so far uploaded

[Sandra Murphy]

I have uploaded a new agenda.

There are two new items on the agenda - “ROA Misconceptions” from Randy Bush 
and a report on Wednesday’s ROA signing party by Markus de Brun.  Both are 
short presentations.

I have compressed some of the other time slots, in order to keep a block of 
time for discussion at the end.  Likely topic: continuing last meeting’s 
discussion of the future of SIDR - possible rechartering.  Each presenter has 
at least as much time as they requested.

All slides I know I have received have been uploaded.

Presenters should check the agenda to be sure I have the right presenter 
listed, name spelled correctly, topic title correct, etc., and check the 
materials uploaded to make sure the right versions are uploaded.  (Meeting 
materials are available on the agenda page 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/96/agenda.html if you click on the “show 
meeting materials” icon and on the meeting materials site 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/96/materials.html.

—Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Re: [sidr] new agenda uploaded

[Declan Ma]

I agree with Steve.

“RPKI Validation Reconsidered” should not be carried on.

And I believe that our WG should look at RPKI operation security from a wider 
perspective and pursue countermeasures according to a deliberate threat model 
as described in draft-kent-sidr-adverse-actions. 


Di Ma

ZDNS Ltd.


> 在 2015年11月5日，23:24，Stephen Kent  写道：
> 
> Sandy,
> 
> I think "draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered served a valuable 
> purpose,
> highlighting valid concerns about potential fragility in the RPKI, in the 
> face of
> errors by CAs and in the context of INR transfers. However, I feel that this 
> I-D
> should not progress.
> 
> The topic of INR transfers is being addressed in much grater detail in
> draft-ymbk-sidr-transfer (which lists Geoff and George as co-authors). This 
> doc.
> for which I provided extensive comments over the summer, is examining 
> discussing
> INR transfers in a more thorough fashion and thus should provide a better 
> basis for
> selecting a standard mechanism for their support.
> 
> The impact of errors by CAs is being examined in a much broader context in an 
> I-D that
> Di Ma and I have authored: draft-kent-sidr-adverse-actions. This document 
> examines
> a very wide range of impacts that can result from an error by a CA or an 
> attack
> against a CA (or an error/attack involving a repository manager). Thus I feel 
> that it
> will provide a more comprehensive analysis of the sort of concerns raised in
> validation-reconsidered.
> 
> Finally, the the validation algorithm change proposed in 
> validation-reconsidered does
> not address the broader range of errors noted in adverse-actions. It also is 
> not compatible
> with current RP software designs that validates CA (not just EE) certs as 
> part of local cache
> maintenance.
> 
> Once the sidr-transfer and adverse-actions I-Ds are completed, I believe the 
> WG
> will be a much better position to develop mechanisms that will address both 
> sets
> of concerns noted above.
> 
> Steve
> 
> ___
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Re: [sidr] new agenda uploaded

[Stephen Kent]

Sandy,

I think "draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered served a valuable 
purpose,
highlighting valid concerns about potential fragility in the RPKI, in 
the face of
errors by CAs and in the context of INR transfers. However, I feel that 
this I-D

should not progress.

The topic of INR transfers is being addressed in much grater detail in
draft-ymbk-sidr-transfer (which lists Geoff and George as co-authors). 
This doc.
for which I provided extensive comments over the summer, is examining 
discussing
INR transfers in a more thorough fashion and thus should provide a 
better basis for

selecting a standard mechanism for their support.

The impact of errors by CAs is being examined in a much broader context 
in an I-D that
Di Ma and I have authored: draft-kent-sidr-adverse-actions. This 
document examines
a very wide range of impacts that can result from an error by a CA or an 
attack
against a CA (or an error/attack involving a repository manager). Thus I 
feel that it

will provide a more comprehensive analysis of the sort of concerns raised in
validation-reconsidered.

Finally, the the validation algorithm change proposed in 
validation-reconsidered does
not address the broader range of errors noted in adverse-actions. It 
also is not compatible
with current RP software designs that validates CA (not just EE) certs 
as part of local cache

maintenance.

Once the sidr-transfer and adverse-actions I-Ds are completed, I believe 
the WG
will be a much better position to develop mechanisms that will address 
both sets

of concerns noted above.

Steve

___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Re: [sidr] new agenda uploaded

[John G. Scudder]

If you don't mind uploading a new new one to reflect the current plan for 
Friday, it would be helpful. Thanks!

--John

> On Nov 3, 2015, at 7:48 AM, Sandra Murphy  wrote:
> 
> A new agenda was uploaded.
> 
> Thanks to Tim to catching an error in the header, a holdover from a long ago 
> agenda.
> 
> —Sandy

___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Re: [sidr] new agenda uploaded

[Sandra Murphy]

I uploaded a new agenda, moving Rob’s time on Friday to Tuesday without any 
attempt to represent Tue timing, moved Randy’s presentation on router keying to 
Friday, and added a presentation of validation reconsidered.

Still on the Friday agenda are Steve Kent and Yu Fu talking about bad CAs.

—Sandy, speaking as a wg co-chair


On Nov 5, 2015, at 2:42 PM, John G. Scudder  wrote:

> If you don't mind uploading a new new one to reflect the current plan for 
> Friday, it would be helpful. Thanks!
> 
> --John
> 
>> On Nov 3, 2015, at 7:48 AM, Sandra Murphy  wrote:
>> 
>> A new agenda was uploaded.
>> 
>> Thanks to Tim to catching an error in the header, a holdover from a long ago 
>> agenda.
>> 
>> —Sandy
> 
> ___
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

[sidr] new agenda uploaded

[Sandra Murphy]

I have uploaded a new agenda, with some changes in ordering to facilitate some 
people's itineraries.

There's also a new presentation by Dr. Declan Ma.  My apologies to Dr. Ma for 
missing his request last week.

For those on the agenda, please check the agenda to see there are any errors.  
Revision requests are quite acceptable.

If you think you should be on the agenda but you are not, send mail to 
sidr-cha...@ietf.org

--Sandy


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

[sidr] new agenda uploaded

[Sandra Murphy]

A new agenda was just uploaded.

I belivee that it contains all the requests for agenda time.

If I have missed an agenda item or if the time alloted or order or name or 
whatever is not appropriate, please reply to both wg chairs.



--Sandy
___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

[sidr] new agenda uploaded

[Sandy Murphy]

I have uploaded a new agenda, adding Ruediger's requested agenda slot.

--Sandy
___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr