Dear Ronald, Thank you for your email. It's probably good to revisit this topic publicly every now and then, so we can have something on the record for future reference.
The RIPE community has repeatedly reminded the RIPE NCC that it has no role to play in policing routing and no mandate to make judgments on whether the route objects people create correspond to legitimate BGP announcements. Given this lack of a mandate, it's hard to imagine that the community would support the RIPE NCC unilaterally sanctioning members for incorrect/malicious route announcements. Despite your request, the RIPE NCC doesn't comment on its members or the investigations it undertakes. Similarly, it has always declined to "Name and shame" its members by discussing them on a public mailing list. If you find inaccurate information in the RIPE Database, please use the report form to let the RIPE NCC know. I fully trust that the RIPE NCC staff will follow up on all cases that are properly reported and take appropriate action. If you feel that the RIPE NCC is failing to uphold its responsibilities as described in RIPE policies and RIPE NCC procedural documents, please let the Board know and we will look into it. On the other hand if you think that the RIPE NCC should get involved in policing route object creation, that's a different discussion. In this case it's not the Board but rather the RIPE community that you'll need to convince. Here you'll find that the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP) is at your disposal - the RIPE NCC can explain how the process works and help you to get started. You could also work with the Database Working Group to see if there isn't a technical solution that might solve some of these issues. Finally, regarding your second email - RIPE NCC staff have confirmed that they did not delete the route objects in question. Regards Nigel Titley Chairman of the RIPE NCC Executive Board
