I would propose adding some text to this draft (probably as a
sub-section in section 2) that says that the SIA defined in RFC 6487 is
omitted when a certificate is used to sign RPSL objects.
perhaps you might also include your reasoning for this seemingly odd
choice.
I agree that the original text allowing multiple signatures supports
the case where the components of the primary key of the object (i.e.,
prefix+ASN) come from different resource holders. I will restore that
text.
this is gonna be really simple; no complications at all i am sure.
btw, was this a consensus of the wg?
randy