It is my understanding that the downstream Org cannot create RPKI ROAs
for Reallocated IP Networks. For example, 206.9.80.0/24 is reallocated
to me (OrgID WIKSTR-1), but I cannot make a ROA for it.
This is obviously suboptimal for adopting RPKI.
Is this something that we could fix with Policy
On 2023-06-23 13:24, Fernando Frediani wrote:
I don't think this should be allowed to happen. ROAs are to be created
by organizations who receive the allocation from the RIR as ultimatelly
they remain responsible for that IP space. If they have allocated a
block to a customer they should be the
On 2023-06-23 12:03, August Yang via ARIN-PPML wrote:
It's worth noting that this issue primarily stems from technical
constraints of the hosted RPKI implementation, rather than being a
direct policy matter related to NRPM.
Intentionally provocative, but semi-serious: can we use policy to forc
On 2023-10-27 12:36, Leif Sawyer via ARIN-PPML wrote:
William Herrin writes:
I believe that prior interaction with each segment of the community,
outside of their duties as AC, should be a hard requirement for rating
a candidate as "qualified" during the elections process.
Quantitatively? Sta
Absolutely.
I’d love to see the number be higher, like 3 or 5. If you can’t find more than
two, are you really going to get anywhere?
--
Richard
> On Dec 5, 2023, at 17:51, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
>
> - 4.4. Micro-allocation
>
> Defines the minimum participant count as "three"
> - 6.10.1
On 2024-05-29 00:22, Owen DeLong via ARIN-PPML wrote:
there are at least a couple of IXPs that are considering (if not
implemented) the elimination of 802.3z and moved up to 802.3ae as a
minimum IX connection.
MICE is officially dropping 1G (on MICE operated switches). The relevant
participan
On 2025-03-04 20:03, Reese, Gus wrote:
The current policy mandates that entities receiving transferred
resources sign a new RSA unless they have an RSA on file no older than
the last two versions. However, defining RSA versioning requirements
within the NRPM does not align with the Policy Dev
From what I understand, one major issue here is that allowing
individuals to obtain resources directly from ARIN makes ARIN a B2C
(business to consumer) business, rather than a purely B2B (business to
business) business. This may (will?) trigger all sorts of additional
legal complexity for ARIN
