[routing-wg] FW: discussion about rogue database objects

Hi Poty, 

In the RIPE region all resources are allowed to be signed for RPKI.  

Policy 2013-04 ( Resource Certification for non RIPE-NCC Members) -
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-04 
Status : Accepted and implemented.  

That allows all IP resources to be used under RPKI within the RIPE region
for registered resources, if there is a contractual agreement between the
resource holder : 
For PA :  valid SSA for LIR membership
For Legacy : Signed agreement as described under RIPE-605
(http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-605 ) explaining how to do so. Like
signing the actual Terms and Condition for an LIR who has legacy space and
wishes to import their Legacy space into the LIR portal for ease of
administration and usage of RPKI. ( Ripe document RIPE-616 ) 
For PI space : Signed End-User Agreement between RIPE NCC, the Sponsoring
LIR and the End-User holder of the resource. 

I don't know what the status is specifically for other RIR's in terms of
their acceptance for RPKI for non-members.  ( legacy holders or PI space ) 
But we (RIPE community) are ready for it from a policy point of view as far
as I see it.  

Regards,
Erik Bais 

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: routing-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:routing-wg-bounces at ripe.net] Namens
poty at iiat.ru
Verzonden: maandag 10 november 2014 14:08
Aan: routing-wg at ripe.net
Onderwerp: [routing-wg] FW: discussion about rogue database objects



-----Original Message-----
From: routing-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:routing-wg-bounces at ripe.net]
On Behalf Of Ronald F. Guilmette
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 1:56 AM
To: routing-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [routing-wg] discussion about rogue database objects


In message <545FDE27.7030702 at velea.eu>, Elvis Daniel Velea
<elvis at velea.eu> wrote:

>*Regarding the future process:**
>*
>I do not think it will be that easy to come up with a process. RPKI may

>not be available for legacy (or independent) resources in all the 
>regions. I think this means the RIRs will first need to speed up the 
>deployment of RPKI for all the resources in their registries...
...

Can anyone speak to this?  What resources in what registries cannot
currently be covered by RPKI?  If the answer is "none", then there is no
problem with requiring that right now, correct?

----------------

There are actually not only technical matters, but sort to say
political, law, ...
As about what resources currently can't be covered by RPKI - they had
already been mentioned: legacy as an example.

Regards,
Vladislav