[db-wg] RIPE Policy Proposal 2018-06 Aims to Delete Conflicting Non-authorative IRR Objects

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 12:52 Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:

> On 15 Oct 2018, at 11:31, Job Snijders <job at instituut.net> wrote:
> >
> > I'm hesitant to add such things because we don't have such a
> > notification & grace period in BGP Origin Validation process when
> > processing BGP route announcements either.
>
> You don’t need one there. If there’s a problem with those you can back out
> the configuration and life will proceed as before. The difference between
> the examples you’re giving and this proposal is that - as it stands - this
> proposal will automatic activate a mechanism with no backout, no grace
> period and no warning.



If we deconstruct RIPE-NONAUTH’s current state of affairs we already are
facing a irreversible concept: if one deletes an object in RIPE-NONAUTH, it
can never be restored.

I’ve made it clear what I think should be done - I think the current
proposal resolves contention between the owner of the route object and the
owner of the resource not being the same entity. But you disagree, so I
propose two things:

1) I’ll produce some data on what will happen to the contents of the
RIPE-NONAUTH database if Origin Validation is applied.

2) let’s sit down face to face at RIPE 77 to see if we can find a
compromise or at least better understand each other’s concerns.

Kind regards,

Job
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20181015/2a981fa8/attachment.html>