nanog mailing list archives
Re: A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption
From: William Herrin <bill () herrin us>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 01:37:33 -0700
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 10:34 PM Doug Barton <dougb () dougbarton us> wrote:
On 4/12/22 9:56 PM, John Curran wrote:Doug, we’re not contracting with these parties to provide any other services…i.e. there’s nothing to "add a rider to”. (Those who have any registration services agreement with ARIN already have access to all services incl. RPKI)Thank you for considering my suggestion. Perhaps I misunderstand the current state. I'm thinking of a scenario where a person holds legacy space, with no [L]RSA, but they do have a registered ASN through ARIN (for example). In that scenario are they eligible for RPKI for their legacy space?
Hi Doug, There are multiple challenges here. In many cases, all number resources held are legacy status so the registrant has no current contracts with ARIN. In others, the resources are held under different org handles where the org handle for the legacy resources is not associated with any contract. In both cases, some of the legacy org handles fail to meet current ARIN standards for legal existence, precluding ARNI from directly forming a contract. ARIN would have to form a contract for RPKI with an entity that is, in the strictest technical sense, different from the entity which holds the addresses. Or consent to change the legacy org to something that has the proper legal existence without creating a contract, which ARIN has to date been adamant that it won't do. Recall that before ARIN the name of the organization was a single line on an email form copied uncritically into the registry. The POC info was far more important. Nothing here that ARIN couldn't overcome of course. But the web is a little bit tangled. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill () herrin us https://bill.herrin.us/
Current thread:
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT), (continued)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) John Curran (Apr 06)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) William Herrin (Apr 06)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) John Curran (Apr 06)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) Owen DeLong via NANOG (Apr 06)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) John Curran (Apr 07)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) Owen DeLong via NANOG (Apr 07)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) John Curran (Apr 07)
- A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption Doug Barton (Apr 12)
- Re: A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption John Curran (Apr 12)
- Re: A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption Doug Barton (Apr 12)
- Re: A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption William Herrin (Apr 13)
- Re: A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption John Curran (Apr 13)
- Re: A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption Alex Band (Apr 13)
- Re: A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption John Curran (Apr 13)
- Re: A way that ARIN can help encourage RPKI adoption Alex Band (Apr 13)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) Owen DeLong via NANOG (Apr 06)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) John Curran (Apr 07)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) Owen DeLong via NANOG (Apr 07)
- Re: ARIN fee structure (was: re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT) John Curran (Apr 07)
- Re: [nanog] Re: 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT - Approximately 40 Jon Lewis (Apr 04)
- Re: [nanog] 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT - Approximately 40 John Curran (Apr 04)