Closed shappleberry closed 6 years ago
We implement RFC 7730, which is the IETF Standards Track TAL format.
There's another IETF Standards Track TAL format: RFC 6490. Is there an advantage to 7730 over 6490?
RFC 7730 added support for multiple URIs and for non-rsync URIs.
There were a couple of reasons for this, one of which I consider silly, but the other was to enable transition from rsync to RRDP.
Thank you! This was good to know. My TAL files are readable now.
Is there a specific format that the RPKI.net toolkit uses for .tal files? It considers the ripe-ncc.tal file unreadable as well as all externally calling .tal files. The only .tal file it can read is the one generated by the parent.