Re: [sidr] CP changes in response to WGLC comments

[John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org>]

Steve - 

 

  In general, these changes are fine, and address the naming parent/child/IANA/RIR/ISP name game issue.

  One issue which is raised is that a RPKI service provider now may be made subject (with one month's notice) to changes to the CP made by the IETF.  As the CP specifies operational practices, this has potential to be impacting for the RPKI service provider and ISP's relying upon such certs.   In order to protect those relying ISPs in the case of a CP change which causes RPKI providers to exit the business, the 9.12.2 implementation time period to should be long enough to allow ISP's to move to an RPKI providers now complying with the new CP document.  I'd recommend 6 months advance notice rather than one for this reason.

Thanks,

/John

On Nov 4, 2009, at 9:25 AM, Stephen Kent wrote:

Changed status to be Best Current Practice from Informational (consistent with eventual BCP designation)

In Section 1.7 revised text (removed references to SIDR WG)

RPKI signed object - Digitally signed data object (other than a

certificate or CRL) declared to be such by a standards track RFC,

and that can be validated using certificates issued under this PKI.

------

Section 1.4.4 revised text (removed references to SIDR WG)

An RPKI signed object is a digitally-signed object, declared to be such by a standards track RFC.

-------

Section 9.12.1 revised text (removed reference to RIRs and IANA, replaced with IETF)

The procedure for amending this CP is via written notice from the IETF in the form of a new Standards Track, BCP RFC that updates or obsoletes this document.

------

Sectioon 9.12.2 revised text (removed reference to RIRs and IANA, replaced with IETF)

The IETF will provide at least one month's advance notice of any changes to this CP.

-------

Section 9.12.3 revised text (removed reference to RIRs and IANA, replaced with IETF)

If the IETF judges that changes to the CP do not materially reduce the acceptability of certificates issued for RPKI purposes, there will be no change to the CP OID. If the IETF judges that changes to the CP do materially change the the acceptability of certificates for RPKI purposes, then there will be a new CP OID.

Section 13.2 (removed last two informative references)

_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
sidr at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr