Hello,
On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 at 20:06, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> I am not sure it is possible, but I would love to see some centralized
> site where all dropped ROV invalids would appear. This way I can see if
> I have a problem as well as if someone tried to hijack my space but was
> thwarted by
Hi,
On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 at 13:48, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> > Monitoring ROV invalids in other people's networks (validators;
> > routers) is not possible and I doubt it ever will be.
> >
>
> We managed to create "Certificate Transparency" logs where all CAs send
> their certificates so with a
Hello Nathalie,
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 at 21:40, Job Snijders via routing-wg
wrote:
> It is always laudable to try to stop children from running around with
> scissors, but RIPE NCC can't really stop operators from hurting their
> network presence. The best RIPE NCC can do is to try to design good
Hello Job,
TL;DR: I disagree.
On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 at 19:10, Job Snijders via routing-wg
wrote:
> I suspect that many people think that "xxx/48 maxlength 50" means "the
> /48, AND the four individual /50s" (mentally skipping over the
> intermediate /49s).
That may be the case. But how is this
Haya Shulman wrote on Linkedin:
> The closely relevant developers are those of
> the different relying party implementations.
Looks like there's a good chance the disclosure process will be even
more messed up then the last one.
Lukas
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password
Hello Stella,
On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 10:39, Stella Vouteva wrote:
> it appears that there were issues in resolving the CDN host
Could you elaborate?
Lukas
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your
subscription options, please visit:
On Fri, 30 Sept 2022 at 09:59, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
> I disagree that having out-of-region objects in the RIPE NCC RPKI repository
> creates a mess. The comparison with IRR is wrong for a number of reasons.
I completely agree, the comparison with IRR is wrong and makes no
sense at all. We are
