RPKI Pilot Participant Notice

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Fri Sep 7 08:10:15 UTC 2012

On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:55 AM, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:

>> Good morning Randy - 
> it is late afternoon

Indeed... that may contribute significantly to the difference in 
perspective.  In the US, little details such as legal structures 
often take on greater importance than would be otherwise warranted.

>>  Are you indicating that RPKI services should be offered without any
>>  RPA (and/or CPS) at all, or that these agreements should legally
>>  adhere without explicit agreement?  There is an statement expressing
>>  that CPS or RPA might benefit from the latter treatment in section
>>  3.4 of the Internet PKI framework (RFC 3647), but it does not
>>  actually hold legally true at the present time.  If you have more
>>  insight or clarity on this matter, it would be most welcome.
> does arin run an irr instance?  


> how much legal bs have you wrapped around it?

If we were establishing it today, I do not know what, if any, legal
machinations would be needed.  This is similar to RFCs, which were
published first without any preamble but now have significant legal
structure at the front.


John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the NANOG mailing list