Level 3's IRR Database

Jack Bates jbates at brightok.net
Sun Jan 30 16:08:51 CST 2011

On 1/30/2011 2:47 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> I'm concerned that if we're trying to avoid another Youtube affair, 
> the RPKI policy acceptability criteria will have to be so strict that 
> this may have a serious effect on overall reachability via the internet. 

Not really. Just a simple, if route invalidly signed, drop it. If route 
validly signed, prefer it over unsigned. That allows people to choose to 
protect their routes, while the vast majority of routes don't need 
protecting. I haven't seen the proper mechanism, though it may exist, to 
say (hey, I already have a route which while not as specific was signed, 
so bye bye).


More information about the NANOG mailing list