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

Hi Job, Tim

On 12/11/2015 16:57, Job Snijders wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:52:36PM +0100, denis wrote:
>>  From what I understood from Gert and Randy's comments it is a user's
>> choice where to put a ROUTE object and there seem to be some reasons
>> why they sometimes choose to put it in the RIPE Database.
>
> Be that as it may, I am not convinced (yet) that non-RIPE objects really
> have a place in the RIPE db. Given that today there _are_ non-RIPE
> objects in the RIPE db, we need to find a way to deal with those. All of
> us hate rogue objects and want to nail down security in such a way that
> the RIPE db no longer is a 'free for all to exploit' database. An
> example of a functional IRR does not allow foreign objects: APNIC. I've
> not heard of that policy leading to any issues.
>

Just another thought on these rogue ROUTE objects. If a ROUTE object has 
been created maliciously for out of region address space and the 
authoritative address space holder asks the RIPE NCC to delete the ROUTE 
object, is there any policy or defined procedure existing now that gives 
the RIPE NCC the authority to delete it immediately?

Or is this one of those 'case by case' situations where there needs to 
be proof of wrong doing before the RIPE NCC can delete it?

Perhaps the RIPE NCC can explain how these situations are currently handled?

cheers
denis