Hi Nathalie, Nathalie Trenaman wrote: > Currently, there isn’t, but we have heard this request for a while and it is > on our roadmap.
thanks for confirming, I was already glad to hear your comment [1] on this topic at last week's NLNOG day after Job's routing security roadmap presentation. From the discussions/emails/tweets it is not yet clear which exact way will be chosen to implement it (route object creation triggering the creation/modification of ROAs or vice versa) but I'm looking forward on having route and ROA creating/modification consolidated to reduce inconsistencies and maybe even increase the rate at which ROAs are created (if every new route object would result in the creation of a matching ROA). As the commentor after Job's talk said [1]: having this in two completely different places as it is currently isn't helping with consistency and adoption. It is certainly a good idea to talk to APNIC since they are already doing it and probably gathered some experiences that you could benefit from when implementing it for the RIPE interfaces. If you can share any rough timeline for this, that would be great. kind regards, nusenu [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BAwBClazWc&t=2586 -- https://twitter.com/nusenu_ https://mastodon.social/@nusenu
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
