Hi, On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 12:34 PM Randy Bush via db-wg <[email protected]> wrote: > > once a route/route6 object in RIPE-NONAUTH becomes in conflict with a > > RPKI ROA it should no longer exist. > > and once a route/route6 object in the ripe irr instance comes in > conflict with a roa published anywhere in the rpki, it should no longer > exist?
This policy proposal concerns exclusively the RIPE-NONAUTH IRR database. If you feel strongly about the information in the "RIPE" IRR source feel free to make a new proposal. (Side note: I believe RIPE NCC staff is working on streamlining the user experience & process to help users ensure there are no conflicts. Since all route/route6 objects in the "RIPE" IRR database are created with the full consent of the owner of the resource I find conflict resolution less concerning.) There are ~ 70,000 objects in the RIPE-NONAUTH database, many of which that have been created without the consent of the resource owner, and the resource owners are left with no method to clean them up. Many of these objects are pre-date resource transfer events. Resource owners are free to not create RPKI ROAs if they don't want to use this mechanism - and they are also free to recreate objects in more suitable (validating) databases. NTT has skin in this game, we'd love to get rid of rogue route objects covering our IP space, and do so with an industry wide procedure that can be applied in other databases too. Kind regards, Job
