Re: ARIN / RIR Pragmatism (WAS: Re: RADB)

[John Sweeting <john.sweeting () gmail com>]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Danny McPherson <danny () tcb net> wrote:

> On 2014-10-23 12:33, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
>  Sounds like you want to see the rirs make sure they get rpki work
> > dine and widely available with the least encumbrances on the network
> > operator community as possible.
>
> Or focus on more short/intermediate term returns like fortifying all the
> existing systems and automating processes that are already deployed and
> focus on ROI of members and operational buffers required by the community
> _today.  E.g., IRR training and investment rather than RPKI, which this
> thread began with.

makes perfect sense to focus on validating existing systems such as IRR.
Seems like very low hanging fruit with a lot of benefit and a good ROI


> I'd continue and say in-addr.arpa or the like for resource certification
> because RPKI is so ugly, silly without a single root aligned with number
> resource allocations, etc.., but that'd require response cycles I'm not
> going to spend there.
>
>  Did you see wes's slides / talk at the last nanog?
> >
>
> I did (after).
>
> Aside, I understand why the ARIN board did what they did with the RPA and
> I don't blame them -- it seemed well considered to me, but that's just me.
>
> Reminded of Taleb's "Fat Tony" quote [paraphrased]: If the pilot ain't on
> the plane, you probably don't want to get on it,
>
> -danny