[136206] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: A top-down RPKI model a threat to human freedom? (was Re: Level
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Benson Schliesser)
Tue Feb 1 18:30:29 2011
From: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin1A7VKk9Pr9yat1S31DNp4hsmPuCG0WHeYnkH3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 17:23:06 -0600
To: Dongting Yu <dongting.yu@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 1, 2011, at 5:13 PM, Dongting Yu wrote:
> Since we are already talking about RIRs, I am curious, who will sign
> the legacy blocks in RPKI?
Since they pre-exist the RIR, it's not clear that any one RIR has =
authority until asked.
(For a discussion of rights, authority, etc, see =
http://ciara.fiu.edu/publications/Rubi%20-%20Property%20Rights%20in%20IP%2=
0Numbers.pdf)
Thus, I think the legacy address holders will have to request "services" =
from an RIR. Or from a trusted third party.
(For instance, see =
http://www.circleid.com/posts/competition_to_regional_internet_registries_=
rir_for_post_allocation_service/)
Cheers,
-Benson
