[DBWG] [members-discuss] [rpd] RIPE proposed changes to the routing registry

[Frank Habicht]

Hi Daniel,

posting identical message to dbwg@ ...

On 5/16/2018 9:34 PM, Daniel Shaw wrote:> 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.
If I understand correctly ...
this could be a choice that a transit provider has already done (long
ago), by putting a condition "source==RIPE" in their filter-generating
scripts.
I understand your above comments to mean that the out-of-RIPE resources
would then no longer match, and Boom!

> Similarly, a transit provider
> could filter by ASN or other attributes today.
I believe those who do filter by ASN, will also still filter by prefix.
And I like that.

> 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
You have a point that there was not much activity.
Let me try to change that.

Can the AfriNIC DB be changed so that Andrew with his non-AfriNIC ASN
can freely, quickly [ie without manual intervention by hostmaster]
create route(6) objects for the AfriNIC IP space.
Could the addition of an attribute to all inet(6)num delegations enable
this?


> 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.
Ack.

Frank

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/dbwg/attachments/20180517/f56a7438/attachment.sig>