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

[Job Snijders]

Dear colleagues,

Perhaps it is good to study how a neighbouring RIR harmonised RPKI and IRR.
LACNIC, serving more than 12,000 member organisations in 33 countries, is a
sizeable operation in terms of regional coordination and facilitation or
IP/ASN registration services, IRR & RPKI. Perhaps it’s lesser known how
exactly their IRR system works.

In the LACNIC service region RPKI ROAs and IRR route/route6 object
management is tightly coupled: meaning, when one creates an RPKI ROA in the
“MiLACNIC” web portal - automatically - without additional user
intervention - corresponding route/route6 objects are created in the LACNIC
IRR service. When a ROA is deleted, the corresponding IRR objects are also
deleted. Irrespective of the maxLength value, only a “least-specific”
route-object is created.

Thus, all LACNIC members use a single interface to manage both IRR and RPKI
- they don’t have to worry about discrepancies because the system doesn’t
allow for discrepancies. It’s not possible to accidentally forget to create
IRR objects, because the system will always do it for you!

The way LACNIC approached this has greatly simplified IRR operations and
widely is regarded as a positive. Over the years I’ve never seen anyone ask
for an opt-out mechanism!

I believe the success of the LACNIC approach can serve as an inspiration
how to tackle this in the ARIN region too. A few advantages of their
approach I see are simplifications in the training materials used to
educate new operators how to publish their routing intentions, reduction of
cost maintaining multiple similar systems, ease of use - people only have
to learn and maintain a single thing, and improved accuracy as there are no
discrepancies between IRR and RPKI data sources.

Kind regards,

Job
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20230907/29b61b52/attachment-0001.htm>