[address-policy-wg] 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region) going to Last Call

Martin wrote:
> > Well, we had that Youtube incedent and there where a few more, so there
> > are people demanding it.
> I am well aware that there is a demand by powerful forces for RPKI or
> something similar.  I do not think the youtube incident and a handful
> other motivate such a drastic system.

I don't see that further. However, engineering tends to overengineer
things to not only solve the imminent problems, but also problems
that could occure somewhen in the future. I don't see RPKI designed
as an evil censorship tool. I'd bet it isn't even bad engineered
(eventhough i haven't had a deeper look on the design yet). The 
only point is that its implementation has implications that from my
point of view hasn't been taken into account properly until now.

> > I don't think that denying that fact and just walk away would get us any further here again.
> I welcome research and debate of this and alternative solutions to
> achieve the goal of avoiding the Youtube incident or making its impact
> less hurtful.

Fine. Thats exactly what I think should be done. Take the concerns
mentioned seriously and put further work to resolve the problems.

> > In contrary, if people seriously start to demand it and we are going to say "well,
> > we will not do something here" then they will start doing that in
> > some other forum, which i would presume is much worse as we here
> > can discuss and raise our concerns.
> Hopefully, the respective WG's at RIPE will remain in charge of the
> PDP process of their respective areas?

If the WG is just sticking their head into the sand and just says
'no, we're against it' without supplying any strategy to archive a
solution everybody can live with, this may well change. 

And that was exactly my point here. Work must be going towards that
solution and not just discarding the current one. 

I hope that clarifys things.

Immo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20110503/3bc86b79/attachment.sig>