Dear Alex, On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 at 19:11, Alex Band <alex@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
NLnet Labs recently committed to building a full RPKI Toolset, including a (Delegated) Certificate Authority, a Publication Server and Relying Party software. As an RP implementation was the easiest way to get going, we now have some running code – in Rust – here:
https://github.com/NLnetLabs/routinator
We’re committed to offering a toolset that is on par with our other projects such as NSD and Unbound, in terms of quality, feature set and update frequency. We’re looking forward to your feedback; in the mean time we’re getting started with the CA and Publication Server.
This is awesome! I think it is important to have multiple high quality implementations so operators have a choice, this way we can work towards a healthy routing security software ecosystem and avoid mono-culture. Kind regards, Job
On 27/Jul/18 16:40, Job Snijders wrote:
This is awesome! I think it is important to have multiple high quality implementations so operators have a choice, this way we can work towards a healthy routing security software ecosystem and avoid mono-culture.
Yes, great to see more implementations out there. Mark.
Job wrote (2018-07-16) [1]:
Perhaps the RIRs should start an outreach program to proactively inform the owners of those 2,200 invalid route announcements to get them to either fix or delete the RPKI ROA.
Since I'm also interested [2] in reducing the amount of RPKI INVALIDs in an efficient way I was wondering if you proceeded with this and if so what reaction you got from the RIRs. thanks! nusenu [1] https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2018-July/096202.html [2] https://medium.com/@nusenu/towards-cleaning-up-rpki-invalids-d69b03ab8a8c -- https://twitter.com/nusenu_
participants (3)
-
Job Snijders -
Mark Tinka -
nusenu