Thanks for your detailed response John. Further comments inline. On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:58 PM, John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> wrote: > > > So, Marcel, please allow me to turn the question around... Do you > do you believe that there should be an RPKI Global Trust Anchor? > Are you concerned about the potential aggregation of control and > risk that may result? (Feel free to answer me privately if you > would prefer.) >
Having a single root seems like the right way to go. There will always be the threat (real or imagined) of outside interference. For that reason I'm sure there will be a small droid army of independent systems monitoring and studying every change the Global Trust Anchor makes - ready to sound the alarm. It's probably easier to keep an eye on one trust anchor than it is to monitor 5 of them. All the other arguments I've heard are in favour of a one-TA system so I won't repeat them. > > At the point in time when we understand the technical architecture > being proposed and its implications, we will formally poll the ARIN > and NANOG community on the question of whether there is support for > having an RPKI Global Trust Anchor. My best estimate is that this > will occur near the end of this year, but there's nothing wrong with > having some discussion in the meantime if the mailing list is otherwise > quiet. :-) > > I hope this provides some insight - thank you for asking about it, > as it has been too long since any status update on this project > (I will work on that as well for the very near future.) > As I said, thanks for the update. > > Thanks! > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > ARIN > > > > Marcel