Alain thanks for this comment. I also had reservations on this text and asked the SSAC KSK WP to comment. On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 09:40:12PM +0000, ALAIN AINA via Ssr2-review wrote:
Hi Eric and al
Do we have evidence to back the statement below ?
==== The review team found no evidence that the propagation delay between publication to each of the letters, and then to each of a letter???s instances, is well l understood. However, propagation delay was an SSR issue as recently as the 2018 KSK rollover, when some instances were observed not to update as fast as others. ====
First of all, I don't understand why anyone would expect propagation delay to anycast servers all over the world over all kind of network infrastructure, to be updating at the same time. It's physically impossible, afaict. So maybe I don't understand the distributed system synchronization concern here, but the world is dealing with inconsistent propagation delays all over the place. Anyway, I asked the WP and Jaap responded with: As far as I know there was no issue updating the instances of the letters. That was business as usual, so they might mean something else. I agree with Alain that some detail is needed, because I am also underinformed here. WRTE mentioning SAC063 and 073, I agree, I think these are OBE. I know I brought these up, because I thought the recommendations was missing context. but as Alain says, the newer context is the current proposal out for public comment: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposal-future-rz-ksk-rollovers-2019-... also note that SSAC is about to release their public comment into this process (it will ask for more details to go through another public comment period, but in general SSAC finds the current proposal acceptable.). Alain, to make sure I understand, you still agree that we should recommend the formal modeling process in Part 2, but just not refer to 63 and 73? I am fine w that. k