[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Recovery Fund

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 03:27:45PM -0600, David Farmer wrote:
> Why is the vetting needed to issue and RPKI certificate any more or less 
> than would needed to bless a transfer or the return of a resource?

It's not more work on an individual record basis.  The difference
is the LRSA vetting, or a transfer vetting is opt-in, it's based
on the number of people participating in those schemes.  Presumably
RPKI would be universal, and thus there would be need to vet all
resources.

Obviously in an RPKI scheme priority could be given to those who
want to transfer; but remember that RPKI can potentially enable
other things like routing security.  There may be a significant
demand for vetting by groups that have no interest in participating
in any transfer scheme but rather want to secure their routing.

So, per-resource load is similar; load on ARIN is likely to be much
higher for RPKI than for transfer.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20081122/e64d6594/attachment.sig>