Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 21/02/2013 15:12, Gert Doering wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 08:52:18AM -0600, David Farmer wrote:
"Re-allocated blocks may be certified to establish the current allocation holder if the receiving party so chooses, and any previous related certificates will be revoked."
Works for me :-) - but now we need someone to volunteer to formally drive this through the policy development process (PDP)...
This is a bad idea for two reasons: [...] The easiest and simplest thing would be to drop the sentence completely, at which point the de-facto RIPE NCC procedures concerning certification will apply.
full support. Just as an observation, imho we are suffering from a mixup of terminology and a lack of experience with all the "funny" details of establishing a (sort of) hierarchical CA and RA environment. The RPKI is meant to create, distribute and manage certificates for the routing plane, not as a digital signature of ownership, true? The authoritative source of information about holdership is the up-to-date Numbers Registry.
If this seems like a sensible and pragmatic approach to others, I can oblige from the policy proposal point of view. Or someone else can, if they want.
Nick
Wilfried.