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] 2019-08 Review Phase (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space)
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] 2019-08 Review Phase (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] 2019-08 Review Phase (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Wed Mar 4 22:42:13 CET 2020
Hi Job, If someone want to ignore people using bogons for bad things, then of course, they have "no cost", but in general I believe most of the operators use someway to filter bogons. RPKI can help on that. RPKI is a secure and automated way to have that information. The SLURM file is not secure. We can of course find the way to secure it, but that keep increasing the cost of using it (and publishing it). El 3/3/20 19:42, "routing-wg en nombre de Job Snijders" <routing-wg-bounces at ripe.net en nombre de job at instituut.net> escribió: Hi, On Tue, Mar 3, 2020, at 19:31, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via routing-wg wrote: > I don't think I'm the one that should calculate that. However, if we > have an alternative proposal with the SLURM file, it can be calculated > (approximately) as part of the analysis impact that will be needed as > well, right? > > May be anyone from the community that already has done that job and > integrated the SLURM in their routers, can provide an estimate cost, > and then multiply it for the number of all the RIRs members? > > I believe (I may be wrong) that the AS0 is much cheaper to implement by > RIPE NCC even if it is several thousand euros, than the number of > worldwide folks that will need to use the SLURM in addition to RPKI > (for non-AS0). Let me rephrase: what is the cost to the community of no implementation of 2019-08 at all? It has been mentioned before that 2019-08 in its current shape seems way too big of a hammer for the problem it claims to solve. I personally consider a SLURM file a good middle-ground, but if it boils down either using the RPKI for this or nothing, the latter option is what I support. Kind regards, Job ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] 2019-08 Review Phase (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] 2019-08 Review Phase (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]