That’s an interesting idea. I’m not sure that LACNIC would want to issue a ROA for RIPE IP space after RIPE issues an AS0 ROA, though. And you’d at least need some kind of time delay to give other RIRs and operators and chance to discuss the matter before allowing RIPE to issue the AS0 ROA, eg in my example mitigation strategy.
> On Apr 21, 2020, at 02:10, Baldur Norddahl <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On 21.04.2020 10.56, Sander Steffann wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> Removing a resource from the certificate to achieve the goal you describe >>> will make the route announcement NotFound, which means it will be accepted. >>> Evil RIR would have to replace an existing ROA with one that explicitly >>> makes a route invalid, i.e. issue an AS0 ROA for specific member prefix. >>> This seems like a pretty convoluted way to try and take a network offline. >> I've seen worse… >> Sander >> > > As long Good RIR continues to publish a valid ROA for the real ASN that evil > AS0 ROA would have no effect? > > Regards, > > Baldur >
