On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Sandra Murphy wrote:
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Stephen Kent wrote:
At 2:33 AM -0400 10/7/08, Brian Dickson wrote:
G...
I'm not sure if any or all of these kinds of use cases are appropriate,
but if any of them are, they may serve to demonstrate the compactness
achievable with this representation.
Examples:
RIR->LIR, RIR has certain specific policies it wishes to enforce
regarding LIR assignments to end-users -- anything bigger than /X
requires justification (i.e. approval) and registration (i.e. ROA).
Either RIR has to create a large swath of ROAs, each of size /X, or it
When I got to this statement, I became very concerned. A ROA is generated
by a prefix holder to specify an AS that the prefix holder authorizes to
originate a route to the prefix in question. Thus, an RIR (or NIR) should
never be signing a ROA. Only ISPs and subscribers who are multi-homed or
who have PI address space should be generating ROAs.
Any chance Brian meant RSA, not ROA? Seems to fit the context better.
On second thought, no it doesn't. sorry.
--Sandy
--Sandy
I didn't read the rest of your message to validate the other examples you
offered, but this one seems seriously out of whack.
Steve
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
