I think from my perspective as a staffer in another RIR, with users who are concerned about abuse of their resources in the RIPE IRR, this is a good proposal. Anyone who is able to create a signed assertion of intent has a strong-proof of intent, which should stand, if older data contradicts it. If this proposal means that the IRR will honour the signed intent, It feels like a good outcome. I am also aware of a number of BGP speakers in the APNIC region who appear to have long-held, stable state in the RIPE IRR data who may be adversely affected by removal so I am keen that the contact from RIPE happens, but its understood older objects may have stale contact info: This simply may not get all cases. Since the specifics here are that a ROA leads to removal, it requires the prime resource holder (inetnums) to consent. That feels respectful of their intent. If they have "forgotten" as a company they depend on IRR data, they are also actively engaged in routing (made the ROA) inside the correct RIR's systems, so the solution appears tractable. https://blog.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Count-of-route-route6-obje... This shows the histogram of objects by age, which refer to APNIC region resources. Approximately 2,900 distinct APNIC region prefixes are represented in route: and route6: objects in the RIPE NCC database. These prefixes distribute over 385 distinct address holders, indirect (NIR sub-account) address holders, a mix of Members, and historical Non-Member resource holders. (from https://blog.apnic.net/2018/08/30/ripe-ncc-moves-to-close-off-a-routing-regi...) I don't think RIR staff should participate in the consensus call on these things, so I offer this as "information around the subject" -George On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 3:16 PM Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2018-06, "RIPE NCC IRR Database Non-Authoritative Route Object Clean-up", is now available for discussion.
The goal of the proposal is to delete an non-authoritative object stored in the RIPE IRR, if it conflicts with an RPKI ROA.
You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-06
As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four-week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the proposers.
At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposers, with the agreement of the Working Group Chairs, decides how to proceed with the proposal.
We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <routing-wg@ripe.net> before 9 November 2018.
Kind regards,
Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC
Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum