Hi Randy

Thank you very much for your quick response. I noted down your feedback, but can you please elaborate a bit more regarding your concern on the concentration of authority? Let me ask you quickly a question: Aren’t we doing this already with RPKI system? Last time I checked my routinator installation, it had 5 root TALs only (apart from the experimental ones) and the recommendation from the RPKI promoters is to keep it as is and not create more root TALs. Did anything change recently, and we missed it?

Nevertheless, this BCOP is targeting a very specific use-case and has neither global applicability nor a policy-enforcement nature. Other network operators perhaps will still find uses cases to operate their networks on RADB/NTT/Level3 etc etc

Kind Regards

Stavros

From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Date: Tuesday, 4 June 2024 at 19:09
To: Stavros Konstantaras <stavros.konstantaras@ams-ix.net>
Cc: Connect-WG <connect-wg@ripe.net>, Andrei Dinu <andrei.dinu@digitalit.ro>, Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it>, Will van Gulik <will@van.gulik.ch>
Subject: Re: [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call

thanks for the work

it could use an executive/tldr summary up front

and i do not support adoption as a bcop.  concentration of authority and
power, just what we're trying not to do these years.

invalidating the irrs of ntt, level3, et alia is destructive, not
productive.

similar for other non-rir irrs.

i would support preferring some irrs in case of duplication/conflict

randy