[ARIN-consult] RPKI/IRR Consultation Reminder and Update

[Richard Laager]

On 2023-09-08 09:54, Rhys Barrie via ARIN-consult wrote:
> In my opinion, opt-in is functionally equivalent to not changing 
> anything at
> all, because 95% of organizations will never make the conscious effort 
> to click
> the button.

Agreed.


> hearing Job's feedback, and seeing LACNIC's success with a
> tightly-coupled integration, I am reasonably convinced as to the 
> validity and
> efficacy of that solution, and I agree that opening the door to 
> discrepancies
> WILL cause discrepancies (and outright issues as a result) to occur. I 
> believe
> that pure opt-in/opt-out exacerbates the long-tail problem as well.

Agreed.


As long as we are talking about RPKI automating IRR, this should be fine.

The opposite (creating a route object creates a ROA) is not reasonable, 
IMHO. I don't think anyone has suggested that approach, though.

Also, AFAIK, nobody has suggested that IRR route objects would require 
ROAs, right? As of right now, I still have the problem that I can create 
IRR records, but not ROAs, as ROAs can only be created for direct 
allocations, not reallocations.

-- 
Richard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20230911/c89151b2/attachment.htm>