Subject: [Sidrops] Meeting in Vancouver

From: Chris Morrow <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 21:06:50 +0000

Howdy WG folks,

The chairs are unsure of their attendance status at this point in
time.  Given that we're going to ask to cancel our WG session at the
in-person venue and seek advice on timing / need for a Virtual Interim
Meeting in April as a replacement.

So, dont' travel on our account (we aren't for your account!) see you
either virtually in April-ish, or in Madrid in July.

-chris
co-chair

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:30:08 -0800

i am sure of my non-attendance

i would like to learn more about
  o aspa and rpki-rtrv2
  o tal migration magic
  o manifest and crl lifetimes and dealing with errors
  o draft-yan-sidrops-roa-considerations should imiho progress

randy

---

From: Di Ma <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2020 10:59:30 +0800

I really look forwards to discussions on manifest and CRL lifetimes and dealing with errors.

Di

> 2020年3月7日 05:30，Randy Bush <[email-masked]> 写道：
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sidrops mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops
>

---

From: Jay Borkenhagen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:20:55 -0400

I agree that's a worthwhile discussion to have.

Presumably https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-sidrops-rp-06.txt would
eventually be updated to reflect whatever consensus might be reached
regarding manifest and crl lifetimes and dealing with errors.

Speaking of that draft: I urge the authors to go through it again to
disambiguate the document's use of the term "RP".  In some places it
seems to refer to a piece of software that needs to be configured, in
others it's a running, configured instance of such software, and in
still others it seems to refer to the operators, the humans who have
decided that running such software is in the best interests of their
network.

Thanks.

						Jay B.

---

From: Di Ma <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:48:45 +0800

Jay,

> decided that running such software is in the best interests of their

You are making sense here and we authors will look into that and try to give a better wording.

As far as I can tell, I see the term ‘RP’  a running, configured instance of some software that can work together to meet the requirements described in this draft.

Di

---

From: Di Ma <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 21:31:50 +0800

Jay,

After my second thought and discussion with co-author Dr. Stephen Kent, the term "relying party" technically refers to a person or organization, so when we mean to refer to the software they employ, just add the word "software" to the text. 

Generally there is no need to distinguish whether the software is to be configured vs. whether it is running.

And we authors will review this draft and make necessary update as per your concern when IETF last call and IESG evaluation are complete.

Di

> 2020年3月11日 10:48，Di Ma <[email-masked]> 写道：
> 
> Jay,
>