[rssac-caucus] Best Practices for the Distribution of Anycast Instances of the Root Name Service WP Conclusion

[Terry Manderson]

Thanks Kaveh and Work Party members,

This is personal opinion, all hats off.

I have some concerns about "Recommendation 3: RSOs should consider the value of certifying their resources through the RPKI, as a potential way to assure route origin authenticity in the future"

I believe it is premature for the RSSAC to recommend that the RSOs consider the future use of RPKI. I think the RSSAC caucus itself should first consider if the RPKI is at a maturity level for use by root server operators in so much as evaluating the standards maturity, operational processes and resiliency of RPKI operators, diversity of RPKI repositories, and diversity of certification organisations in so far as having all resources of all root server operators vested with (currently) 3 RIR organisations.

Thanks
Terry

> On 3 Feb 2018, at 4:06 am, kranjbar <kranjbar at ripe.net> wrote:
> 
> Dear RSSAC Caucus,
> 
> Please find attached outcome document of  ‘Best Practices for the Distribution of Anycast Instances of the Root Name Service’ work party. As it was mentioned in the caucus updates, the work party did not conclude with finishing all of it’s tasks but had many deep discussions about the questions raised in the work plan. This document summarises all of those discussions and conclusions and, at any point in time, if RSSAC or RSSAC Caucus feels one of the questions should be explored in more detail, we always have the option of booting up a new work party around that single issue and achieve more fine grained results.
> 
> Please let me know if you have any suggestions or questions.
> 
> All the best,
> Kaveh.
> 
> 
> <27 November anycast document.pdf>_______________________________________________
> rssac-caucus mailing list
> rssac-caucus at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rssac-caucus