[176587] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN's RPKI Relying agreement
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bill Woodcock)
Thu Dec 4 16:00:28 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Bill Woodcock" <woody@pch.net>
In-Reply-To: <17167.1417722529@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:00:18 -0800
To: "Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>
Cc: Rob Seastrom <rs@seastrom.com>, NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
This pig is less aerodynamic, and fewer people are pushing.=20
In-addr DNS and whois are simple and well-understood protocols, with many pr=
ogrammer-years of software development behind them.=20
The problem isn't the marginal cost of a single transaction, that might only=
be one or two orders of magnitude higher. The problem is the overhead cost o=
f trying to force a poorly-architected system into a semblance of production=
-quality. If you want something that anyone can _actually rely upon_, that'=
s a precursor to doing the incremental transactions.=20
=20
-Bill
> On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:49, "Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.e=
du> wrote:
>=20
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:28:42 -0800, Bill Woodcock said:
>>> On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
>>> Orders of magnitude? Seriously? I can buy it costs 2x or 3x.
>>> But an additional 2 or 3 zeros on the price?
>=20
>> Yep, thats why all this is at issue. If it were cheap, and
>> worked, like in-addr or whois, there wouldn't be an issue, would
>> there?
>=20
> So why does an RPKI request cost *500 times* as much as (say) a request
> to assign an address block? Why is it *that* much more expensive to handl=
e?
>=20
