[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-3 - Staff Assessment
Member Services
info at arin.net
Fri Apr 13 10:34:55 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-2 - Staff Assessment
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-3 - Staff Assessment
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Policy Proposal 2007-3 Documentation of the X.509 Authentication Method ARIN Staff Assessment The assessment of this proposal includes comments from ARIN staff and the ARIN General Counsel. It contains analysis of procedural, legal, and resource concerns regarding the implementation of this policy proposal as it is currently stated. Any changes to the language of the proposal may necessitate further analysis by staff and Counsel. I. Proposal Policy Proposal 2007-3 is available as Annex A below and at: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_3.html II. Understanding of the proposal ARIN staff understands that this proposal would support X.509 authentication; it relies on the adoption of Policy Proposal 2007-1: Reinstatement of PGP Authentication Method. III. Issues and concerns A. ARIN Staff 1. Proposals use the term "crypt-auth", term needs to be defined. Also, would need specific notation, such as crypt-pgp and crypt-x509. 2. "Accepts X.509 signed transactions as authentic communications from authorized POCs" - this needs clarification. What certification sources should be considered when accepting X.509 certificates? 3. NRPM section 12.3 contains procedural language which constrains ARIN's ability to act in the best interest of all parties. It is too restrictive and detailed. 4. At this time, ARIN’s functionality covers only e-mail based communication. The policy uses the general term, “communication”, which may be interpreted to cover other forms of electronic interaction such as web-based communication. The only other “communication” that is directly tied into a specific POC is voting. Should the Election System need to be modified to allow x.509 authentication, assuming we could use parts of the existing system, a ballpark estimate on implementation would be 3-4 months. 5. We recommend that a new NRPM section be created, “12. Communications” and that 12.1 be “Authentication”. The subsequent numbering would change appropriately. B. ARIN General Counsel The policy as proposed poses no significant legal risks for ARIN. IV. Resource Impact - Minimum The resource impact of implementing this policy is viewed as minimum. Barring any unforeseen resource requirements, this policy could be implemented within 120 days from the date of the ratification of the policy by the ARIN Board of Trustees. However, implementation will depend on the outcome of Policy Proposal 2007-1: Reinstatement of PGP Authentication Method. Implementation would not require the acquisition of staff personnel or equipment. It will require the following: - Revisions to registration guidelines - Staff Training Respectfully submitted, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ##*## Annex A Policy Proposal 2007-3 Documentation of the X.509 Authentication Method Policy statement Proposal type: New Policy term: Permanent Policy statement: DELETION FROM THE NRPM 12.3 X.509 This section intentionally left blank. ADDITION TO THE NRPM 12.3 X.509 ARIN accepts X.509-signed transactions as authentic communication from authorized Points of Contact. POCs may denote their records "crypt-auth," subsequent to which unsigned communications shall not be deemed authentic with regard to those records. Rationale: This policy complements the previously-proposed "Reinstatement of PGP Authentication Method" which introduces section 12 to the NRPM. Section 12 relates the existence of three authentication methods. Two of those, mail-from and X.509, were preexisting but not documented within the NRPM. This policy proposal simply seeks to provide brief documentation of the existence of the X.509 authentication method. Because the specific wording of the documentation may be subject to debate, and is in no way interdependent upon the documentation of the other two methods, it is being proposed in a separate policy, so that consensus may be more easily reached. Timetable for implementation: Immediate
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-2 - Staff Assessment
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-3 - Staff Assessment
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list