[175630] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN / RIR Pragmatism (WAS: Re: RADB)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Sun Oct 26 07:41:13 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 11:40:59 +0000
In-Reply-To: <m2zjcj5ctb.wl%randy@psg.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Oct 26, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>=20
> 20% coverage in lacnic low? how do ipv6 and dnssec compare (which is
> damned sad)? over 2,000 in ripe and over 8%? how does that compare to
> ipv6? =20
>=20
> arin, 388 and 0.7%, a joke.
LACNIC numbers (as a percent) are quite good, but my question=20
was why only RIPE has the very impressive total count of ROAs.
You can clearly point to ARIN's legal treatment of the risks involved,=20
but that is not applicable in the APNIC case....
You don't feel there's any correlation between RIPE's IRR approach=20
and their RPKI success? =20
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
