draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-grandparenting-00.txt   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-grandparenting-01.txt 
Network Working Group R. Bush Network Working Group R. Bush
Internet-Draft Internet Initiative Japan Internet-Draft Internet Initiative Japan
Intended status: Informational October 2012 Intended status: Informational April 10, 2013
Expires: April 02, 2013 Expires: October 12, 2013
Responsible Grandparenting in the RPKI Responsible Grandparenting in the RPKI
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-grandparenting-00 draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-grandparenting-01
Abstract Abstract
There are circumstances in RPKI operations where a resource holder's There are circumstances in RPKI operation where a resource holder's
parent may not be able to, or may not choose to, facilitate full and parent may not be able to, or may not choose to, facilitate full and
proper registration of the holder's data. As in real life, the proper registration of the holder's data. As in real life, the
holder may form a relationship with their grandparent who is willing holder may form a relationship with their grandparent who is willing
to aid the grandchild. This document describes simple procedures for to aid the grandchild. This document describes simple procedures for
doing so. doing so.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
skipping to change at page 1, line 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 35
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 02, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 12, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights publication of this document. Please review these documents
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Suggested Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Suggested Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. What to Do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. What to Do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
There are circumstances in RPKI operations where a resource holder's There are circumstances in RPKI operation where a resource holder's
parent may not be able to, or may not choose to, facilitate full and parent may not be able to, or may not choose to, facilitate full and
proper registration of the holder's data. As in real life, the proper registration of the holder's data. As in real life, the
holder may form a relationship with their grandparent who is willing holder may form a relationship with their grandparent who is willing
to aid the grandchild. This document describes simple procedures for to aid the grandchild. This document describes simple procedures for
doing so. doing so.
An example might be when provider A allowed a child, C, to move to An example might be when provider A allowed a child, C, to move to
other provider(s) and keep their address space, either temporarily or other provider(s) and keep their address space, either temporarily or
permanently, and C's child, G, wished to stay with provider A. permanently, and C's child, G, wished to stay with provider A.
Or a child, C, in the process of going out of business might place Or a child, C, in the process of going out of business might place
their grandchildren in precarious circumstances until they can re- their grandchildren in precarious circumstances until they can re-
home. The grandparent, without disturbing the child's data, could home. The grandparent, without disturbing the child's data, could
simply issue ROAs for the grandchildren, or issue certificates for simply issue ROAs for the grandchildren, or issue certificates for
those willing to manage their own rpki data. those willing to manage their own rpki data.
Or, in the process of a transfer, the swing point (the CA in the
hierarchy where the buyer and seller meet) may be multiple CAs up
from the seller or buyer, and need to manage the resource during a
time where intermediate CAs are not prepared to act in the time
required by the business process.
Certification Authorities with a large number of children, e.g. very Certification Authorities with a large number of children, e.g. very
large ISPs or RIRs, might offer documented grandparenting processes large ISPs or RIRs, might offer documented grandparenting processes
and/or agreements. This might reassure grandchildren with worries and/or agreements. This might reassure grandchildren with worries
about irresponsible parents. about irresponsible parents.
Other examples occur in administrative hierarchies, such as large Other examples occur in administrative hierarchies, such as large
organizations or military and other government hierarchies, when A's organizations or military and other government hierarchies, when A's
child C wishes to manage their own data but does not wish the child C wishes to manage their own data but does not wish the
technical or administrative burden of managing their children's, Gs', technical or administrative burden of managing their children's, Gs',
data. data.
2. Suggested Reading 2. Suggested Reading
It is assumed that the reader understands the RPKI, see [RFC6480], It is assumed that the reader understands the RPKI, see [RFC6480],
ROAs, see [RFC6482], BGPSEC Router Certificates, see [I-D.ietf-sidr- ROAs, see [RFC6482], BGPSEC Router Certificates, see
bgpsec-pki-profiles], and the operational guidance for origin [I-D.ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles], and operational guidance for
validation, [I-D.ietf-sidr-origin-ops]. origin validation, [I-D.ietf-sidr-origin-ops].
3. What to Do 3. What to Do
A hypothetical example might be that A has the rights to 10.0.0.0/8, A hypothetical example might be that A has the rights to 10.0.0.0/8,
has delegated 10.42.0.0/16 to their child C, who delegated 10.42.2.0/ has delegated 10.42.0.0/16 to their child C, who delegated 10.42.2.0/
23 to their child G. C has changed providers and kept, with A's 23 to their child G. C has changed providers and kept, with A's
consent, 10.42.0.0/16, but G wishes to stay with A and keep 10.42.2.0 consent, 10.42.0.0/16, but G wishes to stay with A and keep 10.42.2.0
/23. /23.
Perhaps there are also AS resources involved, and G wishes to issue Perhaps there are also AS resources involved, and G wishes to issue
skipping to change at page 3, line 40 skipping to change at page 4, line 20
There are threats of social engineering by G, lying to A about their There are threats of social engineering by G, lying to A about their
relationship to and rights gained from C. relationship to and rights gained from C.
There are also threats of social engineering by C, attempting to There are also threats of social engineering by C, attempting to
prevent A from giving rights to G which G legitimately deserves. prevent A from giving rights to G which G legitimately deserves.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA Considerations. This document has no IANA Considerations.
6. References 6. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles] [I-D.ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles]
Reynolds, M., Turner, S. and S. Kent, "A Profile for Reynolds, M., Turner, S., and S. Kent, "A Profile for
BGPSEC Router Certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists, BGPSEC Router Certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists,
and Certification Requests", Internet-Draft draft-ietf- and Certification Requests", draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-
sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles-03, April 2012. profiles-04 (work in progress), October 2012.
[I-D.ietf-sidr-origin-ops] [I-D.ietf-sidr-origin-ops]
Bush, R., "RPKI-Based Origin Validation Operation", Bush, R., "RPKI-Based Origin Validation Operation", draft-
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-sidr-origin-ops-19, August 2012. ietf-sidr-origin-ops-20 (work in progress), February 2013.
[RFC6480] Lepinski, M. and S. Kent, "An Infrastructure to Support [RFC6480] Lepinski, M. and S. Kent, "An Infrastructure to Support
Secure Internet Routing", RFC 6480, February 2012. Secure Internet Routing", RFC 6480, February 2012.
[RFC6482] Lepinski, M., Kent, S. and D. Kong, "A Profile for Route [RFC6482] Lepinski, M., Kent, S., and D. Kong, "A Profile for Route
Origin Authorizations (ROAs)", RFC 6482, February 2012. Origin Authorizations (ROAs)", RFC 6482, February 2012.
Author's Address Author's Address
Randy Bush Randy Bush
Internet Initiative Japan Internet Initiative Japan
5147 Crystal Springs 5147 Crystal Springs
Bainbridge Island, Washington 98110 Bainbridge Island, Washington 98110
US US
Email: randy@psg.com Email: randy@psg.com
 End of changes. 16 change blocks. 
32 lines changed or deleted 39 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/