North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1?
> Ok, Larry, let me ask the $10,000 question: > > If I announce 204.137.64/20 to you, how do you know if I am > authorized to do so or not? > > The answer is, absent something LIKE a NACR (ie: RR, RA, etc) you don't. > > So now, if you *don't know*, do you take it or don't you? > > I'm not arguing against NACRs and RAs. In fact, just the opposite. If > you're going to filter, and I understand that it can serve a purpose, then > you *MUST* trust some authoritative source, and that source must have the > information to make the decision. Even with a route registry, you have no way of knowing, apriora, that the registration is correct. There have already been "helpful" attempts to register information for others w/o their consent. Eric C. & I came up with this idea about the same time. I call it "Chain of Custody" and Eric has other names for it. In general, it depends on religious registration in whois and/or rwhois, the distributed IRR and PGP. Here is a brief summary: Basically, I have made a proposal to have the Internic set an example by registering all delegations in whois/RWhois and signing the delegation. All down-stream ISPs should do the same (register delegations in RWhois and sign any downstream delegations) When a custodian wishes to register a delegation for routing, they sign the request. That way, registry operators can follow a "chain of custody" to give priority when duplicate registration requests are entered into one or more registries. --bill