Subject: [Sidrops] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity-05: (with COMMENT)

From: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 21:56:17 -0700

Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity-05: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

BCP doesn't seem appropriate, but I wish there was a stronger document status we could give this.

In Section 2:

   If it tried to do so, aside from the liability, it would end in a
   world of complexity with no proof of termination, as X.400 learned.

Is there a reference describing the X.400 lesson that could be included here?

   Registries such as the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) provide
   INR to real-world identity mapping through whois and similar
   services.  They claim to be authoritative, at least for the INRs
   which they allocate.

I think "WHOIS" is properly (or at least traditionally) in all-caps.

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2022 10:57:32 -0700

hi murray,

thanks for the review

> status we could give this.

the whack-a-mole stream?  :)

all in all, it's sad that this document is needed.  but it has been
shown to be.

> Is there a reference describing the X.400 lesson that could be

i am not aware of a good cite for the 1992 kobe meeting </ dripping
sarcasm>

but, i take your point.  a knowledge of history is required.  might be
easiest to drop the ref to X.400.  whatcha think?

and i suspect that non-cs folk will not get 'proof of termination'.
hmmm.

> I think "WHOIS" is properly (or at least traditionally) in all-caps.

i am inclined to lean on the rfced more than seems to be the current
fashion in the iesg.  how about

   Registries such as the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) provide
   INR to real-world identity mapping through WHOIS, [RFC3912], and
   similar services.  They claim to be authoritative, at least for the
   INRs which they allocate.

thanks again.

randy

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2022 22:56:13 -0700

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 10:57 AM Randy Bush <[email-masked]> wrote:

> [...]

That's probably sufficient.  I was just curious when I read this sentence
to read more about the history, but didn't know where to turn.  Certainly
not a blocking comment.

>    INRs which they allocate.

Works for me.

-MSK