[DBWG] RIPE proposed changes to the routing registry

[Daniel Shaw]

Dear DB WG,

Please note the below sent to the members-discuss at afrinic.net list. As that is a closed list, I'm adding here too as an alternate for wider community discussion.

This is in response to the following posting to multiple lists, publicly archived on the RPD list:
https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2018/008412.html

Best,
Daniel


> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Daniel Shaw <daniel at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [rpd] RIPE proposed changes to the routing registry
> Date: 16 May 2018 at 22:34:10 GMT+4
> To: members-discuss at afrinic.net
> 
> Dear Andrew, Sander, Community,
> 
> First to address the specific concerns in regards to this upcoming change in the RIPE DB:
> 
> 1. It's extremely unlikely this would affect anyone's connectivity or filtering today.
> 
> For those that may not be familiar with IRR data as applied to BGP filters, any IRR data includes a 'source:' attribute that indicates the database it originates from. It's typical for an operator to query multiple sources. It's also typical for any given database system to mirror and provide data from multiple sources.
> 
> All that RIPE NCC are doing is flagging objects that are not authenticated by RIPE members by using a different source attribute as an indicator. Querying the RIPE systems will return all data by default.
> 
> This *does* allow for filters to easily separate out RIPE authoritative data from the rest in future, but this would be a choice by those doing the filtering. Similarly, a transit provider could filter by ASN or other attributes today.
> 
> 2. The part of the change that is most important is that no new objects can be registered in the RIPE DB going forward, for non-RIPE resources.
> 
> There is a concern about route(6) objects where the resources are allocated by AFRINIC, but need to originate from a non-AFRINIC ASN. - It is not impossible to create these objects, but it does involve manual intervention by AFRINIC staff for the time being, and not automated.
> 
> 
> AFRINIC staff do follow the RIPE DB Working group list, and this change has been under discussion for a number of years already. This has been one of the drivers behind the web site tooling to import IRR data, the IRR bootcamps and the appeals to members to use the AFRINIC IRR that have been made.
> 
> We thank you for the feedback that we can further improve on communications around database and data related work, issues and changes.
> 
> We'd like to draw all members attention to our own Database Working Group mailing list. This change was brought to that list by one of the then RIPE DB WG chairs in mid-2017, and had no responses. The AFRINIC DB WG was launched on the web site in late 2016, and all the info is still here: https://www.afrinic.net/community/working-groups/dbwg
> 
> It would be great if further discussions could be held on that list, as well as any other or future feedback in regards to WHOIS and IRR operations, feature and development.
> 
> Regards,
> Daniel

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 901 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/dbwg/attachments/20180516/7d997da7/attachment.sig>