[governance] The standards about the RPKI are out

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

Good article, nice to be reminded to read it.  

One of the critical points in that discussion is the Sandra Murphy quote:

> 
> the
>  ability 
> of
>  a 
> relying
>  party 
> to 
> choose 
> a 
> trust 
> anchor 
> is 
> a 
> big
>  get‐out‐of‐jail‐free
> 
> card 
> for 
> those 
> who 
> are 
> allergic 
> to 
> the
>  idea 
> of 
> one 
> root. 
> NOT 
> that 
> I'm
> 
> recommending
>  using 
> that 
> card.

and the authors' contention

> As 
> long
>  as 
> it 
> is
>  unclear 
> how
>  RPKI 
> achieves 
> compatibility 
> among
>  multiple 
> roots,
>  it 
> is 
> disingenuous 
> to
>  pretend 
> that 
> RPKI 
> allows 
> ISPs 
> a 
> free choice 
> of 
> trust 
> anchors 
> – 
> just 
> as 
> it 
> is 
> disingenuous 
> to
>  pretend
>  that 
> anyone 
> who 
> wants 
> to 
> create 
> an 
> alternate 
> DNS
>  root 
> can 
> easily 
> do 
> so.

Today we find more efforts in the creation of various forms of circumvention.  I think this has the folliwng effects:

- serves as a warning for those who look to impose strictly hierarchical regimes
- produces an increasing number of circumvention techniques and opportunities
- increases the mindset that alternate solutions are possible and worth working on

So while it may be disingenuous to contend that _anyone_ could create an alternate root or a alternate RPKI trust anchor, it is not quite as disingenuous to contend that someone could.

I also agree with the point that routing is an important topic for governance discussion and that these issues deserve consideration in the IGC and in the governance discussions in general.  

avri


On 5 Feb 2012, at 12:09, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> The 14 (!) RFC about the RPKI security system (signing of routing
> announcements to avoid new PakistanTelecom vs. YouTube cases) have
> been issued: RFC 6480 to 6494.
> 
> There have been unfortunately very few discussions on the RPKI in the
> various governance meetings, probably because it is a practical issue.
> 
> A good summary and introduction to the possible political consequences
> of the RPKI is still
> <http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/RPKI-VilniusIGPfinal.pdf>.
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t