Hi, Yes, that was indeed a cut and paste error - my apologies.
I believe that the repository now also contains http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-huston-sidr-keyroll-00.txt, which is the draft I was referring to in my request for WG adoption. Thank you, Geoff On 26/07/2010, at 6:45 PM, Sandra Murphy wrote: > Thank you, Geoff. We'll definitely cover this in the meeting on Wednesday. > > Can you tell me/us what the relationship is between the draft > draft-huston-sidr-keyroll-00.txt you mention below and the recently announced > draft: > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > Title : CA Key Rollover in the RPKI > Author(s) : G. Huston, et al. > Filename : draft-huston-sidr-aao-profile-0-keyroll-00.txt > Pages : 8 > Date : 2010-07-26 > > This document describes an algorithm to allow an entity who > undertakes the role of a Certification Authority in the Resource > Public Key Infrastructure to perform a rollover of its key pair. > This document also notes the requirements placed on Relying Parties > who maintain a local cache of the objects that have been published in > the distributed Resource Public Key Infrastructure repository > publication structure. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-huston-sidr-aao-profile-0-keyroll-00.txt > > > > I'm thinking cut-and-paste error in creating the new draft name, but that's > just me. > > > --Sandy > > On Mon, 26 Jul 2010, Geoff Huston wrote: > >> >> On 14/07/2010, at 12:36 PM, Geoff Huston wrote: >> >>>>> - Key roll-over algorithm >>>>> >>>>> Our software currently implements a specific way to do roll-overs. At >>>>> the time we implemented this it wasn't 100% clear to us how this >>>>> *should* be done, and indeed whether there should be some prescribed way >>>>> to do this. >>>> >>>> I believe that we need to have a single, prescribed way to do this; each >>>> CA needs to know what is expected of it by its subordinate CAs and by all >>>> RPs. I believe we should have a separate document that clearly articulates >>>> what a CA is required to do. There are CA-local aspects to this procedure, >>>> as Geoff's text notes. The parameters for those belong in the CPS for the >>>> CA. The current description is not normative and I think that needs to >>>> change. >>>> >>> >>> >>> You are proposing that the procedure as described in section 8 of >>> draft-ietf-sidr-res-certs-18.txt be placed into a normative form in its own >>> document? >> >> >> In collaboration with George Michaelson and Steve Kent, we have lifted out >> section 8 of draft-ietf-sidr-res-certs-18.txt and placed into a normative >> form in its own document. This is in the drafts repository as >> draft-huston-sidr-keyroll-00.txt. >> >> I would like to request via the WG chairs that the WG adopt this document as >> a WG document. >> >> Thank you >> >> Geoff _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
