This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/routing-wg@ripe.net/
[routing-wg] some stats for proposal 2018-06
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] some stats for proposal 2018-06
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] some stats for proposal 2018-06
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Job Snijders
job at ntt.net
Thu Oct 18 12:25:12 CEST 2018
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 01:01:50PM +0300, Alexander Azimov wrote: > In the attachment is raw data that was used in > https://ripe77.ripe.net/presentations/123-RIPE-NONAUTH.azimov.pdf > It shows a list of globally visible prefixes that have route objects ONLY > in RIPE-NONAUTH. For these prefixes, the removal of route objects from this > database may lead to DoS. I somewhat disagree with your use of the word "denial of service" in this context. :-) The route objects are *only* removed if the owner of the prefix creates a RPKI ROA - and iff they *do* create a RPKI ROA, a route object is automatically published via NTT's IRR service. Question (which may be really hard to answer) - how many of those prefix holders are able to create RPKI ROAs for those prefixes? Kind regards, Job
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] some stats for proposal 2018-06
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] some stats for proposal 2018-06
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]