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

[Job Snijders]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 at 00:05, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 2:52 PM Job Snijders via ARIN-consult
> <arin-consult at arin.net> wrote:
> > I've not yet seen anyone argue a compelling case why it should be made
> > possible to turn this off.
>
> Because you are not smart enough to imagine all of the operational
> situations a user of the system might face and need to work around.
> The failing isn't unique to you: no one is that smart. Which is why
> the really smart people design systems that are flexible enough to let
> their users deal with the unexpected.


Thanks for the pinch, Bill :-)

You appear to argue it must be made possible to allow for all configuration
permutations (for the sake of it being possible). One can easily construct
Venn diagrams of RPKI and IRR data, and conclude that it makes no sense to
consider disjoint IRR data if one has deployed RPKI-ROV (or has plans to).

The real opt-out is to not create ROAs, if one doesn’t wish IRR objects to
be created following ROA creation. As I understand the ARIN consultation so
far, it’ll be perfectly possible to create IRR objects without creating
RPKI ROAs - that should satisfy some.

If I’m understanding you correctly, you don’t offer a compelling case,
other than that - theoretically - one must exist. And yes, it’s possible
such a case exists, thus I’m asking, and also sharing my experience with
this community about how automated RPKI-to-IRR conversion services in
practise have proven to be very beneficial at Internet-scale, so that’s
what I recommend ARIN to implement.

Kind regards,

Job

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20230907/60cd31c6/attachment.htm>