it's just a consequence that our initial idea was just about to protect allocations of our members - not about secure routing at all On 26 Oct 2014, at 14:40, John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
On Oct 26, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
20% coverage in lacnic low? how do ipv6 and dnssec compare (which is damned sad)? over 2,000 in ripe and over 8%? how does that compare to ipv6?
arin, 388 and 0.7%, a joke.
LACNIC numbers (as a percent) are quite good, but my question was why only RIPE has the very impressive total count of ROAs. You can clearly point to ARIN's legal treatment of the risks involved, but that is not applicable in the APNIC case....
You don't feel there's any correlation between RIPE's IRR approach and their RPKI success?
/John
John Curran President and CEO ARIN