it's just a consequence that our initial idea was just about to protect allocations of our members - not about secure routing at all
On 26 Oct 2014, at 14:40, John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> wrote: > On Oct 26, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com> wrote: >> >> 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? >> >> arin, 388 and 0.7%, a joke. > > LACNIC numbers (as a percent) are quite good, but my question > 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, > but that is not applicable in the APNIC case.... > > You don't feel there's any correlation between RIPE's IRR approach > and their RPKI success? > > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > ARIN
