On 15/11/2012 00:38, Arturo Servin wrote: > Nick, > > Perhaps this is not the place, but ...
It probably isn't. Let's discuss the technical issues. Nick > I am still finding these arguments about RPKI as a bunch of fud (please > do not take it personally). I think that are much easier, cheap and > practical methods (or hammers) that would accomplish the same goal. In > fact, any entity trying to use RPKI as a hammer I would say that it is > very badly advised (to said the least). > > Regards, > as > > > > <snip> > On 14/11/2012 21:52, Nick Hilliard wrote: >> >From a non-technical point of view I also have serious concerns about RPKI >> in terms of it being used as a hammer that politicians / bureaucrats / LEAs >> / judges / etc are (and that's "are" as in present tense) extremely >> interested in as a potential future means of blocking content / services >> which they happen not to like. Although GROW is not the place for this >> particular discussion, this aspect of RPKI concerns me to the extent that I >> am disturbed about the wisdom of developing the technology in the first >> place: we're building an on/off button for prefixes throughout the >> Internet. We need to be careful what we wish for because one day, we might >> get it. > _______________________________________________ > GROW mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow > -- Network Ability Ltd. | Chief Technical Officer | Tel: +353 1 6169698 3 Westland Square | INEX - Internet Neutral | Fax: +353 1 6041981 Dublin 2, Ireland | Exchange Association | Email: [email protected] _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
