The internet is supposed to be a decentralized network.

I don’t think that one country should get to unilaterally decide whether another country gets internet, no.

So a highly specific problem couched in terms of the legal obligations of the registry. But,you ignore the other dimension of WHY a legal authority might require a registry to act.Do you honestly think the world would be better if there was no international law, or legal constraints on ISPs? Do you think BGP operators are somehow supra legal?The registry system we live in has operated for almost 3 decades now, an inheritance of a prior informal arrangement. It&#x27;s a mutuality. If you want to change it, get involved in it&#x27;s policy process.

I&#x27;m sure there&#x27;s several ways in which ICANN and RIPE could screw Russia over. I&#x27;m also sure (or at least hopeful) they understand this would achieve nothing outside of creating a splinternet.

I get your broader point, but making it potentially easier to cut Russia specifically off from the Internet might not be the worst thing in the world.

My concern about RPKI is legal pressure on the registries. By centralising all of Russia&#x27;s allowed routes on a database server in the Netherlands and automatically enforcing it, it&#x27;s trivial for the Dutch government to cut off Russia&#x27;s internet access by tampering with that database.

RPKI now protects 70% of internet routes