Subject: [sidr] Last Call: <draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup-04.txt> (An Out-Of-Band Setup Protocol For RPKI Production Services) to Proposed Standard

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:06:06 -0800

The IESG has received a request from the Secure Inter-Domain Routing WG
(sidr) to consider the following document:
- 'An Out-Of-Band Setup Protocol For RPKI Production Services'
  <draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup-04.txt> as Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
[email-masked] mailing lists by 2017-01-10. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract

   This note describes a simple out-of-band protocol to ease setup of
   the RPKI provisioning and publication protocols between two parties.
   The protocol is encoded in a small number of XML messages, which can
   be passed back and forth by any mutually agreeable secure means.

   This setup protocol is not part of the provisioning or publication
   protocol, rather, it is intended to simplify configuration of these
   protocols by setting up relationships and exchanging BPKI keying
   material.

The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup/ballot/

No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.

---

From: tom p. <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 10:55:15 +0000

When I saw BPKI in the Abstract, I thought 'typo'!  Reading on, it
isn't; in which case, it needs expanding in the Abstract.

Appendix A is in RelaxNG; I would like a reference for that language.

Is Appendix A Normative?  i.e. in the event of a mismatch between the
body of the I-D and Appendix A, which wins?  If Appendix A, then that
reference should be Normative.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "The IESG" <[email-masked]>
To: "IETF-Announce" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Chris Morrow" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 9:06 PM

---

From: Rob Austein <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 18:15:47 -0500

> reference should be Normative.

Thanks for the review!  I agree with all of the above, will post
revisions post-LC unless there is reason to update sooner.

Yes, I think the RelaxNG schema had best be normative.  We already
found and fixed one minor disagreement between text and schema;
unsurprisingly, running code in that case agreed with the schema.