Hi Lu, Are you disagreeing with the proposal, or disagreeing with the implementation details? I have seen several requests to delay implementation, but none with a valid technical reason to not close a security flaw. As I brought up at the microphone, I would love to see a solution built that would allow me to use address space allocated by all RIRs where I am a member in any of their IRR systems. However, that is out of scope for this proposal and would likely require a proposal to all five RIRs to build an authenticated method of validating and documenting IRR records. Please feel free to correct me if there was a technical reason to continue allowing unvalidated space in the RIPE IRR.
Thanks, Sean > On Jun 14, 2018, at 12:23 PM, Lu Heng via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote: > > Hi Denis: > > Consensus is neither unanimity nor majority. > > Below is a quotation from RFC: > > "quite often we are letting the majority win the day without consideration of > minority concerns. " > > "Lack of disagreement is more important than agreement" > > "Rough consensus is achieved when all issues are addressed, but not > necessarily accommodated" > > We have a disagreement because one of the critical issues of our current > network is not addressed. > > If there is one strong disagreement without valid counter argument, the > disagreement/issue is therefore not addressed. > > I believe the issue raised in the thread is not properly addressed therefore > there is no actual consensus. > > That being said, we appreciate the community effort to have all the RIR > co-operated together to fix their IRR, and we also support stopping > abuse(even if only to a certain degree) in the ripe database. > > Moreover, I do realize procedurally, we were not here in the list while the > consensus was reached. > > The current process will have my full support if RIR system's IRR can be > fixed as a whole, rather than just having one more problem created in another > place. > > > > > >> On 14 June 2018 at 22:57, denis walker via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote: >> Hi All >> >> The co-chairs of the DB-WG are talking in the background to the RIRs about >> how this change will impact the holders of their address space. We are >> following the points raised here and checking some issues with the >> appropriate RIRs. The RIPE NCC Database team is also in the loop of these >> talks so any relevant points can be included in their impact analysis. >> >> As some have already said consensus is not unanimity and there is a >> consensus to close this security hole in the RIPE Database. Even though the >> security hole will continue to exist in many alternative and commercial IRRs >> and will continue to be exploited by abusers for some considerable time. >> >> cheers >> denis >> co-chair DB-WG >> > > > > -- > -- > Kind regards. > Lu >
