[routing-wg] 'route:' object authorisation

Yes, that would make life a lot easier. As I've discovered very recently.

Best regards,

Paul Hoogsteder
Meanie AS31019
Breedband Delft AS34108

> Hi all,
>
> Over on the DB-WG list at the moment there's a discussion that
> participants
> of this WG may be interested in.
>
> George Michaelson of APNIC has said that APNIC's approval process for
> route
> objects currently goes like this:
>
>> For your information, APNIC Hostmasters have moved to a mode of
>> operation
>> where for inetnum owners where the AS holder is not the same person, and
>> a
>> request is lodged with helpdesk for assistance, the hostmasters manually
>> override and create the object for the inetnum holder, only removing it
>> if
>> an AS holder objects. The inetnum holder needs to be recognised in our
>> systems.
>>
>> Its a hand-mediated inetnum-only route object. Previous practice was to
>> wait for explicit approval from the AS holder. Now, its created first,
>> and
>> withdrawn if there is an objection.
>>
>> There have been no complaints. APNIC HM are considering portal changes
>> and
>> other process work to automate this.
>
> The holder of the aut-num is sent an email asking them to contact APNIC if
> they would like the route object to be removed.
>
> Alex Band has asked for the RIPE community's opinions on whether this
> would
> be a good thing for RIPE to implement. If you have an opinion about it,
> please speak up!
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
>
>