ARIN's RPKI Relying agreement

[woody at pch.net (Bill Woodcock)]

> On Dec 4, 2014, at 10:17 AM, George, Wes <wesley.george at twcable.com> wrote:
> WG] Has there been any actual discussion about how much "nobody" would
> have to pay for ARIN (or another party) to fix the balance of liability
> and provide a proper SLA that led to "no, I don't want to pay for that"
> responses from those who are expressing the concern, or is this just
> conjecture on your part?

Iâ??ve asked a lot of people, â??Would you be willing to pay ARIN for RPKI services,â?? and the answer has always been â??no.â??  Until I get a â??yes,â?? itâ??s hard to put a number (other than zero) on how the market values RPKI.  So, asking how much more risk ARIN is willing to take on seems a little premature.

> The problem with free services is that often you get what you pay for when
> it comes to support, warranty, etc.

Yep.

                                -Bill




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20141204/c6f8ede7/attachment.pgp>