Chris,

I have seen no further feedback on the document - we (the authors) believe
it is move on, can we please request a WGLC?

Cheers
Terry

On 8/09/11 12:42 PM, "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We seem to have sat on this a bit and cogitated... are we prepared to
> call -02 'good enough to progress' and ask for WGLC??
> 
> -Chris
> 
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Terry Manderson
> <terry.mander...@icann.org> wrote:
>> The second ROA (ROA 2) below would of course be address 10.1.0.0/20
>> maxlength  20.
>> Apologies for the cut/paste error.
>> Cheers
>> Terry
>> On 22/06/2011, at 11:37 AM, "Terry Manderson" <terry.mander...@icann.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> a single ROA with:
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>>      | asID     | address           | maxLength     |
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>>      | 64496    | 10.1.0.0/16       |    16         |
>>      |          |-----------------------------------+
>>      |          | 10.1.0.0/20       |    20         |
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>> 
>> versus 2 ROAs that contain
>> 
>>      ROA 1
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>>      | asID     | address           | maxLength     |
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>>      | 64496    | 10.1.0.0/16       |    16         |
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>> 
>>      ROA 2
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>>      | asID     | address           | maxLength     |
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>>      | 64496    | 10.1.0.0/16       |    16         |
>>      +----------------------------------------------+
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Terry
>> 
>> On 22/06/11 11:25 AM, "internet-dra...@ietf.org" <internet-dra...@ietf.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> 
>> directories. This draft is a work item of the Secure Inter-Domain Routing
>> 
>> Working Group of the IETF.
>> 
>>        Title           : Use Cases and Interpretation of RPKI Objects for
>> 
>> Issuers and Relying Parties
>> 
>>        Author(s)       : Terry Manderson
>> 
>>                          Kotikalapudi Sriram
>> 
>>                          Russ White
>> 
>>        Filename        : draft-ietf-sidr-usecases-02.txt
>> 
>>        Pages           : 30
>> 
>>        Date            : 2011-06-21
>> 
>>   This document provides use cases, directions, and interpretations for
>> 
>>   organizations and relying parties when creating or encountering RPKI
>> 
>>   object scenarios in the public RPKI in relation to the Internet
>> 
>>   routing system.
>> 
>> 
>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>> 
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sidr-usecases-02.txt
>> 
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> 
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>> 
>> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
>> 
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sidr-usecases-02.txt
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> 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
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

Reply via email to