[bcop] Fwd: [routing-wg] Fwd: Abstract of the MANRS BCOP
- Next message (by thread): [bcop] RIPE-706 published: Mutually Agreed Norms for Routing Security (MANRS) Implementation Guide
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Benno Overeinder
benno at NLnetLabs.nl
Mon Jun 4 21:58:47 CEST 2018
For information to the BCOP mailing list. MANRS BCOP LC is concluded and we move forward to publish the document as a RIPE Document. Best regards, Jan Zorz & Benno Overeinder -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [routing-wg] Fwd: [bcop] Abstract of the MANRS BCOP Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 21:55:08 +0200 From: Benno Overeinder <benno at NLnetLabs.nl> To: routing-wg at ripe.net Thank you all for the discussion and feedback. >From the email thread we conclude there are no principal objections and close the LC. Best regards, Jan Zorz & Benno Overeinder On 29/05/2018 15:12, Job Snijders wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:03:48AM +0300, Hank Nussbacher wrote: >> On 28/05/2018 14:53, Job Snijders wrote: >>> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 07:16:34PM +0300, Hank Nussbacher wrote: >>>> On 17/05/2018 17:02, Benno Overeinder wrote: >>>> >>>> Maybe I'm missing it when reading the website and the BCOP but where >>>> does it state to *not *allow /25 or more specifics? >> >>> If someone registers a /25, and announces it, and the RPKI ROA >>> allows it, then what is the problem? :-) >> >> I am not talking about a registered /25. I am talking about someone >> hijacking your /24 or your /21 by announcing a bunch of /25s. > > I'm pretty sure the MANRS documentation suggests that you should not > accept & propagate hijacked prefixes (regardless of prefix length). > > Kind regards, > > Job > -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
- Next message (by thread): [bcop] RIPE-706 published: Mutually Agreed Norms for Routing Security (MANRS) Implementation Guide
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ BCOP Archives ]