This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2008-08 New Version and Draft Document Published (Initial Certification Policy for Provider Aggregatable Address Space Holders)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 New Version and Draft Document Published (Initial Certification Policy for Provider Aggregatable Address Space Holders)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 New Version and Draft Document Published (Initial Certification Policy for Provider Aggregatable Address Space Holders)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Erik Bais
ebais at a2b-internet.com
Wed Feb 9 16:50:20 CET 2011
> - you're in favour of the general principle, want some details changed, > but agree to pospone that to the next round of certificate-related > proposals (like "this proposal does not cover PI" - yes, we know, the > plan was to "start with the easy bits = PA"). Why is it stated : > This proposal only applies to IPv4 ALLOCATED PA blocks that were issued by the RIPE NCC and excludes early registration and legacy space, as well as > blocks marked as ALLOCATED UNSPECIFIED or ALLOCATED PI. That was one of the topics I noticed when I used the certification website for my own LIR. ( After some peer pressure by a guy named Alex B. ) I would think/argue that this would be more useful for specifically PI, rather than just doing it for PA. And to make things probably worse for the discussion, I would think that having the LIR manage this on behalf of their PI customers, might not be a bad idea, also because the location of the online certification site is in the LIR portal and this could be seen as one of the tasks a LIR does on behalf for their customers. PI LIR customers that doesn't want their specific LIR to deal with their certification process, could either change LIR or change to a Direct Assignment End-User, but I'm guessing that would be a very small group of all PI customers. It is my experience that PI customers don't want to deal with the 'RIPE stuff' and/or are not very responsive into sorting their stuff out, as long as they have access to their addresses/objects. And yes, I do realize that having a third party in the middle (the LIR) might be seen as an additional security risk, specifically in dealing with certificates, but that could be a different discussion. If the CA-TF isn't planning to change the policy to include ALLOCATED PI, is there a set time-frame on when this will be proposed / implemented ? Regards, Erik Bais Erik Bais | A2B Internet BV | +31 299 707 115 ( Office ) | +31 6 5122 1952 ( Dutch cell ) | ebais at a2b-internet.com |
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 New Version and Draft Document Published (Initial Certification Policy for Provider Aggregatable Address Space Holders)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 New Version and Draft Document Published (Initial Certification Policy for Provider Aggregatable Address Space Holders)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]