...
If the number of CAs is used to estimate the size of a global RPKI
repository (number of objects), then the distinction between hosted
and delegated model doesn't matter. It matters if you want to estimate
the number of different repositories to query. But I don't know what
to do with th
...
Ok, then I'll continue with mine line of thinking.
From the RIR stats files that RIRs publish daily we could get the
numbers of distinct resource holders. They are:
AFRINIC 1310
APNIC7957
ARIN35380
LACNIC 4278
What is the definition of a "distinct resource holder?" Does this
co
Hi Stephen,
Stephen Kent wrote:
> ...
>> Ok, then I'll continue with mine line of thinking.
>> From the RIR stats files that RIRs publish daily we could get the numbers of
>> distinct resource holders. They are:
>>
>> AFRINIC 1310
>> APNIC7957
>> ARIN35380
>> LACNIC 4278
> What is the
Sharon,
-- We show that it is possible to revoke a ROA surreptitiously,
through methods other than (the obvious) revocation lists. See Section
2.2.1 of the report.
The terminology above is not quite correct, since only one of the five
"methods" results in revocation per se. I suggest using the t
> Nonetheless, all of the methods for whacking a ROA described in the
> paper are detectable by anyone who monitors the RPKI. One might argue
> that each resource holder should monitor his/her RPKI pub point to
> detect any action that causes one's ROA to become unverifiable.
thanks to shane for w
Oleg,
No. You broke the line in the wrong place. I meant "many (NIRs or LIRs)".
In your text the "many" is distributed over both terms, NIRs and LIRs.
You should have just omitted NIRs,
since there are not "many" of them .
Not necessarily. The LIR could create a ROA for client's assignment,
us
