[routing-wg] 2018-06 New Policy Proposal (RIPE NCC IRR Database Non-Authoritative Route Object Clean-up)

Dear Tom, Tore,

On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 2:04 PM Tom Smyth <tom.smyth at wirelessconnect.eu> wrote:
> Im happy with the proposal,
> again I think the prior notification + graceperiod suggestion makes sense
>
> +1
>
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 12:57, Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote:
> >
> > * Marco Schmidt
> >
> > > A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2018-06, "RIPE NCC IRR Database Non-Authoritative Route Object Clean-up", is now available for discussion.
> > >
> > > The goal of the proposal is to delete an non-authoritative object stored in the RIPE IRR, if it conflicts with an RPKI ROA.
> >
> > I've read the policy proposal and I think it makes sense.
> >
> > I see some respondents in db-wg asking for a notification of an upcoming
> > deletion followed by a grace period. That's a reasonable ask, considering
> > that a deletion of a RIPE-NONAUTH object is irreversible.
> >
> > In any case, +1.

I am not sure that RIPE NCC can reliably figure out who to email - do
you email the adversary?

It may be tricky to programmatically find the appropriate contacts to
send the notification. The route/route6 object's "notify:" attribute
(when present) is perhaps not entirely suitable in this context -
since that mail address may not point to the resource holder but
rather to a previous owner, an adversary or simply the wrong people.

If it is acceptable to the community that a percentage of
notifications won't arrive at all, or go to the entirely wrong people
- I'm willing to entertain the possibility of amending the proposal to
add one-off notifications when an object is deleted. But I do think
it'll lead to more confusion, rather than be useful.

Kind regards,

Job