rpki vs. secure dns?

Mon Apr 30 07:18:12 UTC 2012

On 29 Apr 2012, at 22:50, Nick Hilliard wrote:

> On 28/04/2012 14:04, Alex Band wrote:
>> At RIPE 63, six months ago, the RIPE NCC membership got a chance to vote
>> on RPKI at the general meeting. The result was that the RIPE NCC has the
>> green light to continue offering the Resource Certification service,
>> including all BGP Origin Validation related functionality. It's correct
>> that concerns were raised in the area of security, resilience and
>> operator autonomy, as you mention. These concerns are continuously being
>> evaluated and addressed. The response to the update that was given at
>> RIPE 64 two weeks ago indicated that the membership and Community are
>> happy with the approach the RIPE NCC is taking in this regard. Of course
>> I realize that some people will never be convinced, no matter which
>> steps are taken…
> 
> Alex, I have to take exception with your statement that people in the RIPE
> region are generally happy about RPKI and the RIPE NCC RPKI project. They
> aren't.

That's not what I said. :)

> -  a substantial number of people, both within the RIPE community and
> within the RIPE NCC membership have serious concerns about the long-term
> legal consequences of this project which have not (in their opinion) been
> addressed adequately.

I already linked to my RIPE64 presentation from two weeks ago before, but here it is again:
https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/77-RIPE64-Plenery-RPKI.pdf

Slide 2-4: we heard you. This is what I said:

>> The response to the update that was given at
>> RIPE 64 two weeks ago indicated that the membership and Community are
>> happy with the approach the RIPE NCC is taking in this regard.

This is where I suspect you may be:

>> I realize that some people will never be convinced, no matter which
>> steps are taken…

So all in all you quoted me well. :)

-Alex

Now getting in my car for some internet-free holidays in the sun. See you all in a week!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2355 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20120430/96377ac0/attachment.bin>