[db-wg] Foreign ROUTE objects in RIPE Database - final decision?

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 03:00:55PM +0100, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 02:46:54PM +0100, Nick Hilliard via db-wg wrote:
> > Job Snijders wrote:
> > > I think this touches upon an incredibly important question: how do
> > > we distinguish between garbage and properly authenticated "route:"
> > > objects covering RIPE-managed space?
> > 
> > and more to the point: are there good reasons and community support
> > for continuing not to distinguish between the two.
> 
> Well, distinguishing in the irrdb is one thing, but how would you
> distinguish between them in RealLife(tm)? It's not like you can
> not route/accept a cross-RIR route: object (at least not without
> Breaking The Internet)

Some people may make a choice to ignore objects with source
RIPE-NONAUTH, or some may let other sources have precedence over
RIPE-NONAUTH. I can also imagine improvements to abuse handling systems
which now know that they might need to take the route with a grain of
salt. We'll see what innovation is possible!

> Also, what would the distinguisher be for eg. a route: with
> prefix from RIPE and ASN from ARIN? RIPE-PARTIALLY-AUTHENTICATED?

Just "source: RIPE" - because it is authenticated following the chain
from RIPE to inetnum holder to mnt-by/mnt-routes. That the ASN comes
from ARIN (or wherever) is irrelevant, just like with RPKI.

Kind regards,

Job