> Well, if you use a ROA as your only signed object, then yes. But really I
> was hinting at RTA or RSC: use the mechanism to countersign an instruction
> to RADB or any other IRR specifically about the RPSL you want to eject.
>
> Not "because ROA do this" but "do this specific thing I command
Jay Hennigan wrote:
> Long story short, we consolidated acquisitions into a single AS, returned
> the old AS to ARIN, and a 2006 RADB entry that looks to have been
> auto-generated by Level 3 with the old AS is still hanging around, causing
> other to question it.
If it's source: LEVEL3, drop a
Well, if you use a ROA as your only signed object, then yes. But really I
was hinting at RTA or RSC: use the mechanism to countersign an instruction
to RADB or any other IRR specifically about the RPSL you want to eject.
Not "because ROA do this" but "do this specific thing I command because I
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 9:56 PM George Michaelson wrote:
> Wouldn't it be cool if we had a cryptographic mechanism to sign an
> authority to the IRR publisher to eject old data.
>
> Some way you could prove you have control of the asset, and the let the
> RADB people know you repudiated some
Wouldn't it be cool if we had a cryptographic mechanism to sign an
authority to the IRR publisher to eject old data.
Some way you could prove you have control of the asset, and the let the
RADB people know you repudiated some old data, made under somebody else's
authority which you can't remove
Tagging onto this thread as it's relevant to me.
Is there any mechanism for removing stale cruft that someone else has
added to IRR? Two of our subnets have some cruft from an automated
script that was accurate in 2006 when they were created, but are no
longer valid.
Long story short, we
Job Snijders via NANOG wrote:
> Dear Lee,
Hi Job,
> *ring ring* - "IRR/RPKI helpdesk how may I help you today?" :-)
What a fantastic helpdesk it is, too! ;-)
> Another way to satisfy this request is to ask the organization's
> provider to create an AS-SET (preferably RIR-operatored IRR such as
> 2. On the ARIN side, when ARIN-NONAUTH goes away next year, does that do away
> with our ability to do proxy route objects? Do we need to require all of our
> BGP customers to set up their own IRRs?
Not only ARIN. LACNIC and TC (the two IRRs covering the LAC region, TC
for Brazil, LACNIC for
Dear Lee,
*ring ring* - "IRR/RPKI helpdesk how may I help you today?" :-)
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 08:25:10AM -0500, Lee Fawkes wrote:
> I have a couple of questions about best practices for Internet Routing
> Registries. I'm able to find lots of documentation about *how* to do
> things, but not
Good morning Operators;
I have a couple of questions about best practices for Internet Routing
Registries. I'm able to find lots of documentation about *how* to do
things, but not a lot of documentation about when I *should* do things. I
work for a medium-sized ISP in the US, and we are
10 matches
Mail list logo
