On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
Let me start by saying a couple of positive things:
1) In order to even start on securing this space, we are going to need some
sort of certificates
2) As far as I can tell, in order for the certificates to make any sense they
have got to be
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
In message 48da8f07-cc0a-4cfa-9153-056585483...@virtualized.org
David Conrad writes:
[.. snip, sorry ..]
Is this scenario accurate?
I haven't a clue. :-) I'm out of the layer 8 loop.
My understanding is that an entity with a very large
Stephen Kent wrote on 16-09-2009 17:53:
[...]
Statements about perceived trust in TAs are useful in PKIs that anoint
3rd parties as TAs, independent of real world authorization. The RPLI is
not such a PKI. Instead it seeks to have the real world entities that
manage allocation of resources
Sandy,
On Sep 17, 2009, at 5:59 AM, Sandra Murphy wrote:
I recognize that there is an fear that this system somehow puts ISPs
under someone's control. I would answer that there is not any more
control than is already the case.
I suppose it depends on what people are going to do with RPKI.
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, David Conrad wrote:
Sandy,
On Sep 17, 2009, at 5:59 AM, Sandra Murphy wrote:
I recognize that there is an fear that this system somehow puts ISPs under
someone's control. I would answer that there is not any more control than
is already the case.
I suppose it
Hi Steve,
On 17/09/2009, at 1:53 AM, Stephen Kent wrote:
In the local TA management scheme I described, an RP gets to specify
the set of resources it believes is associated with a given key
(cert). The software enables an RP to assert what it knows to be
true, overriding what the
knows
Sandy and David,
On 18/09/2009, at 5:25 AM, Sandra Murphy wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, David Conrad wrote:
Sandy,
On Sep 17, 2009, at 5:59 AM, Sandra Murphy wrote:
I recognize that there is an fear that this system somehow puts
ISPs under someone's control. I would answer that there is
Chairs,
apologies for nagging, but this really is a good idea.
Can this be implemented?
Cheers
Terry
On 11/09/09 10:50 AM, Terry Manderson terry.mander...@icann.org wrote:
I second that motion!
Terry
On 11/09/09 10:45 AM, George Michaelson g...@apnic.net wrote:
Dear Working group
