[routing-wg] FW: discussion about rogue database objects
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] FW: discussion about rogue database objects
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] FW: discussion about rogue database objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Tue Nov 11 10:52:32 CET 2014
Hi, On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 01:48:31PM +0400, poty at iiat.ru wrote: > Technical possibility does not mean that you can force it to be > implemented. While there are related documents for legacy resources for > example, not all the legacy resource holders not having any relationship > with RIPE NCC will abide the rules. > On the other hand not all RIPE NCC members seem to interested in RPKI as > there is always a question on trusting, treats and local law. Personally > me is against using this mechanism. So, what are *your* suggestions to solve the imminent problem at hand? The requirements are clear: - permit documentation of legitimate use of out-of-region resources - stop people from adding route: objects for which they are not authorized Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 811 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/routing-wg/attachments/20141111/3ddca32b/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] FW: discussion about rogue database objects
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] FW: discussion about rogue database objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]