On 2013-03-20 09:00, Roque Gagliano (rogaglia) wrote:
I do not believe the work has been peer-reviewed and I detected a
couple of bizarre statements (such as deleting an object = revocation
or the idea of "overwriting" a ROA to replace an existing one).
Much of the work presented here is not "peer reviewed'. Paper is here:
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe/papers/RPKImanip.html
I'm sure the authors would welcome comments.
What I believe it adds to our work are a number of scenarios on how
to implement grand-parenting (not all valid) if we ever decide to
take
that problem.
What specific finding(s) concerns you?
The general observation as an operator that this would potentially
impact my operations (and reachability to my peers, etc..) but is
outside of my control, and that sufficient buffers are required here.
Nothing new, just another datapoint for folks with various
perspectives..
-danny
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
