On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Danny McPherson <da...@tcb.net> wrote:
> On 2014-10-23 12:33, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > Sounds like you want to see the rirs make sure they get rpki work >> dine and widely available with the least encumbrances on the network >> operator community as possible. >> > > Or focus on more short/intermediate term returns like fortifying all the > existing systems and automating processes that are already deployed and > focus on ROI of members and operational buffers required by the community > _today. E.g., IRR training and investment rather than RPKI, which this > thread began with. > makes perfect sense to focus on validating existing systems such as IRR. Seems like very low hanging fruit with a lot of benefit and a good ROI > > I'd continue and say in-addr.arpa or the like for resource certification > because RPKI is so ugly, silly without a single root aligned with number > resource allocations, etc.., but that'd require response cycles I'm not > going to spend there. > > Did you see wes's slides / talk at the last nanog? >> > > I did (after). > > Aside, I understand why the ARIN board did what they did with the RPA and > I don't blame them -- it seemed well considered to me, but that's just me. > > Reminded of Taleb's "Fat Tony" quote [paraphrased]: If the pilot ain't on > the plane, you probably don't want to get on it, > > -danny > > > > > > > >
