[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Recovery Fund
owen at delong.com
Sat Nov 22 17:05:28 EST 2008
On Nov 22, 2008, at 1:27 PM, David Farmer wrote:
> On 22 Nov 2008 Leo Bicknell wrote:
>> In a message written on Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 01:25:36PM -0600,
>> Randy Bush wrote:
>> I admire the work you and others are doing, and I'd like to see it
>> move forward. I have yet to see any reason why it would be sane
>> to base a transfer policy on full deployment of RPKI. The fact of
>> the matter is ARIN resource holders do not have RPKI certificates;
>> and even if that process were started today the vetting to issue
>> certificates to some groups of people (e.g. Legacy Holders) is
>> likely to take years.
> Why is the vetting needed to issue and RPKI certificate any more or
> than would needed to bless a transfer or the return of a resource?
>> At this point I think baseing any transfer policy decisions on the
>> existance of RPKI is foolish.
> I'd agree with not wanting to link one with the other, but the
> vetting that is
> necessary for transfer, return of resource to ARIN for
> redistribution, or RPKI
> is mostly equivalent.
Depending on RPKI for an open transfer process in the wild west would
require that everyone still wanting to issue a meaningful route has been
vetted. Depending on vetting to effectuate a particular transfer can
It's not an effort issue, but, one of timing.
More information about the ARIN-PPML