[DBWG] Fwd: route-object auto-created from a ROA

Frank Habicht geier at geier.ne.tz
Tue Oct 16 11:39:44 UTC 2018

Hi Avinash,

I guess I still owe you a response to this.

I agree with all that you've said.
I assume that's in line with the original request you've received.

So it can be done, it would be used, it would be helpful.

I guess all we need to know is:
will it be done?
how soon?


On 12/10/2018 09:04, Avinash GOKHOOL wrote:
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: [DBWG] route-object auto-created from a ROA
> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 10:34:31 +0400
> From: Avinash GOKHOOL <avinash at afrinic.net>
> To: Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz>
> Hi Frank,
> Thanks for the encouraging words.
> To answer your question, we need to be sufficiently confident that such
> a tool will be useful and actually used by members.
> As for the implementation, I think we can make it quite simple. Create
> and Delete, as required, only route & route(6) objects via MyAFRINIC. If
> someone does not wish to issue ROAs, she may still use the current
> method to create her route objects.
> However, if she wishes to issue ROAs, then when submitting the ROA form
> on MyAFRINIC, we can lookup the existing route objects and if there are
> some missing, ask if these need to be created. For that we will need to
> have another form to capture and validate input for the other attributes
> of the route object.
> Similarly, when someone wishes to revoke her ROA, we may lookup the
> route objects and delete them if she so wishes.
> In this scenario, we do not really have to worry about route objects
> being modified, since only the attributes "route" & "origin" are common
> to a ROA.
> However, in the event that a route object is deleted directly on the
> WHOIS, the ROA cannot be automatically revoked.
> Regards
> Avinash
> On 10/10/2018 10:11, Frank Habicht wrote:
>> Hi Avinash,
>> thanks for the email.
>> I think it would be a useful added feature.
>> While [I agree,] it's not how this is done normally now, it's an
>> improvement, and I don't see why this wouldn't be "the way it's done" in
>> the future.
>> And, if there are no objections, I think it would be very good if we
>> could work towards this better future. and being ahead of the wave would
>> also be good.
>> What would it take to get it done?
>> Regards,
>> Frank
>> On 05/10/2018 09:58, Avinash GOKHOOL wrote:
>>> Hi Group members,
>>> We have received a request from a member asking to have the possibility
>>> of creating corresponding route objects from their ROAs.
>>> While this is technically possible, it is not really the normal way of
>>> adding authoritativeness to BGP announcements. You would normally create
>>> your route objects and then issue ROAs according to the announcements.
>>> We would like to have your input with regards to the added value that
>>> such a tool would provide to members.
>>> Please feel free to share your ideas and concerns.
>> _______________________________________________
>> DBWG mailing list
>> DBWG at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/dbwg

More information about the DBWG mailing list