[anti-abuse-wg] [routing-wg] [db-wg] Solving the issue of rogue ROUTE objects in the RIPE Database

On Nov 07, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:

> > However, the discussion at hand seems to me to be about the data
> > consumption side, I feel that you raised the implicit question "Are
> > RIR's IRR relevant?" to which my answer is YES.
> unfortunately, the answer for many operators is NO.  they voted with
> their feet.  you can say what they SHOULD do.  my family has a lot of
> jokes about how the world should be.
So apparently this depends on local customs: in my area it is quite
common for regional operators to use the RIPE IRR as a single stop
solution for their prefix-lists generation needs, so it is very useful
to be able to register there as well the few prefixes of customers with
non-RIPE assignments.

For a practical example see:
whois -r -T route -i origin AS12637

It shows a prefix from a non-RIPE network, and if it were not possible
to register it there I would have had to contact each one of my peer who
build their filters from the RIPE IRR and ask them to add it manually.

> the ripe region is an outlier.  and in a good way.  we should not induce
> to other regions without measurement and can not tell operators there
> how to run or register their networks.
This is not the goal: the point is that (some) RIPE operators want to 
register in the RIPE IRR the prefixes of their own foreign customers who 
come to Europe with ARIN networks.

-- 
ciao,
Marco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20151107/f68b28a3/attachment.sig>