[ncc-services-wg] Improved Secure Communication for Registration Services (RS) Mailboxes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

>
>>> We're only a small LIR, and we already see the burden of
>>> having to many "standards" to chose from. As of know, RIPE
>>> was steering the course with a clean (sub-)set, and it
>>> was OK for us.
>
>> I am not really following you here. What is the problem for you with
>> the option of either using PGP or X.509?
>
> From what I understand, some RIPE things can already only be
> done using lir-portal. Is that correct ?

Yes....but for all I know, all that can be done with PGP and email to 
hostmaster at ripe.net or equivalent mail address as well.

>
> So, for the foreseeable future, we have to train the staff using
> the right tool for the right matter, which is just additional
> workload.

Well, you will have to train them to use ANY tool. Be it email+PGP or 
LIR-portal+X.509...

>> Some of the LIRs want X.509,
>> some PGP. Isn't it good that the NCC tried to cater for both needs? As
>> Shawn pointed out, the proposal is not to remove the PGP option.
>
> I've seen too many such "Oh, we cover both" schemes in the past
> to know where it's heading, shortterm gain, longterm pain 8-}

I would be really interested in examples here...

I will admit that I have concerns about the X.509 stuff, like the 
authorization chain to the mirrors (that I did a poor job of explaining 
in Amsterdam). but I am not sure there is that much issue with  using 
both systems.

- - kurtis -

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.3

iQA/AwUBQD4H7KarNKXTPFCVEQLKCgCeMWrmQaopyJacVnFQEsTdjthz/aAAmgK6
JUAuPU+SBgD6e2ggsJMFMSv4
=Uzze
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----