Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] RPD Digest, Vol 160, Issue 5

Kakel Mbumb kakelmbumb at gmail.com
Sat Jan 4 11:13:43 UTC 2020


The proposal for RPKI is not applicable as it centralises the control of
internet; and also represents a potential risk for government to overtake
it.
We are a community and need to be independent on the way we treat our
resources; so i oppose this proposal.
*KAKEL MBUMB*
*Chargé du Département Entrepreneuriat au Forum National de la Jeunesse
(FNJ)*

*Coordinator, YPARD-RDC Grand Katanga, Agricultural Development through
Youths*

*Project Vice Coordinator, Agribusiness Cooperative - CAAPJECO*
*Consultant, RESOJEC, Youth Chamber of Commerce*
*Country Representative, Mashinani Hub ,ICT skills for rural communities*
*Yali RLC EA Cohort 6 Alumnus, Business & Entrepreneurship*
*Lubumbashi, Haut-Katanga Province*
*Democratic Republic of the Congo (Congo, DRC)*

*Phone: +243 993 656 038 (Whatsapp) *
*Facebook: **https://www.facebook.com/kakelmbumb
<https://www.facebook.com/kakelmbumb>*
*Twitter: **https://twitter.com/KakelMbumb <https://twitter.com/KakelMbumb>*
*Linked in: **https://www.linkedin.com/in/kakel-mbumb-240534ba/
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/kakel-mbumb-240534ba/>*
*Skype: kakel.mbumb1*




Le sam. 4 janv. 2020 à 12:07, <rpd-request at afrinic.net> a écrit :


> Send RPD mailing list submissions to

> rpd at afrinic.net

>

> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

> rpd-request at afrinic.net

>

> You can reach the person managing the list at

> rpd-owner at afrinic.net

>

> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

> than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."

>

>

> Today's Topics:

>

> 1. AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT01: "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and

> Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space" (Sylvain Baya)

> 2. Re: New policy proposals and updated ones - RPKI-ROAs

> (Daniel Yakmut)

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Message: 1

> Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2020 00:01:55 +0100

> From: Sylvain Baya <abscoco at gmail.com>

> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>, "PDWG's Mailing List"

> <rpd at afrinic.net>

> Subject: [rpd] AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT01: "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated

> and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space"

> Message-ID:

> <

> CAJjTEvEDJog_EvR8O5VYvi6uf+yhdN-tsWhzaxnhkDH4mGSTwg at mail.gmail.com>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

>

> Hi all,

>

> Best wishes for this new year ; added in the Grace era !

>

> Please my comments are below (inline)...

>

> 2020-01-03 17:46 UTC+01:00, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>:

> >

> >

> >> On Dec 30, 2019, at 06:38 , Paschal Ochang <pascosoft at gmail.com> wrote:

> >>

> >> Hello Jordi,

> >> feliz Navidad y un Feliz A?o Nuevo.

> >>

> >> I have some concerns regarding this proposal and also some

> clarifications

> >> .

> >>

> >> I think statistically AFRINIC has a good percentage of IPv4 address

> space

> >> covered by route origin authorization as compared to APNIC. APNIC has a

> >> very low percentage statically hence it's hurried acceptance of the

> >> proposal.

> >

> > I corrected the subject line to be descriptive of what is meant by ?the

> > proposal/this proposal??

> >

>

> Dear Owen,

>

> Thanks for your email.

>

> ...yes ! adjusting the subject line helps to focus the discussion,

> but i'm not sure that there was a real need in this particular case :-/

>

> ...btw, your timing is perfect, with the new year :-D

>

> >

> > There?s no relationship between your statement and the proposal.

> >

>

> ...not sure !

> But if you append ?intent? to ?proposal? ; then i'll certainly agree ; -)

>

> ...please see below.

>

> >

> > The proposal creates AS0 ROAs for addresses in the RIR inventory which

> have

> > not been issued or which have been reclaimed or returned.

> >

>

> Exact !

>

> ...but don't forget that usually, in this PDWG, the title and problem

> statement

> (and even the description of the proposed solution) of a DPP (Draft Policy

> Proposal) means nothing.

>

> Yes, that's sad ! but true :'-(

>

> >

> > It has nothing to do with addresses which have been issued but are not

> > covered by an ROA.

> >

> > As such, I see no problem with the proposal.

> >

> >> I think using the approach in this policy is majorly to handle

> accidental

> >> incidents rather than malicious attacks whereby someone might try to

> >> manipulate an AS path.

> >

> > RPKI does nothing at all to help with manipulated AS Paths. It is only

> > effective against prefixes originated from the wrong ASN.

> >

> > In the case of this policy, it will aid in the prevention/detection of

> > unauthorized use of unallocated number resources.

> >

> >> It is suggested to always drop invalid announcements, rather than

> applying

> >> a lower preference. This is because sub-prefix hijackings would be still

> >> possible if invalids are accepted and this would go against the purpose

> of

> >> RPKI validation. However I think the text should state how invalids

> >> should be dropped in order not to trigger loosing connectivity.

> >

> > I?m not sure how many different ways you think there are to drop a

> route. At

> > least on the routers I?ve run (Cisco, Juniper, Mikrotik, Vyatta, Ascend,

> > Livingston, Foundry, etc.), you can either drop a prefix or accept it.

> The

> > decision is binary and there are not multiple ?ways? to drop on. In some

> > cases, you can choose additional behaviors such as logging, but I hardly

> see

> > that as relevant to whether connectivity is preserved or not.

> >

> > I think what you may be missing in your understanding is that Invalid is

> not

> > the same as Unknown. RPKI validation provides three possible results:

> > 1. Valid ? The route matches a ROA and the ROA matches the

> Origin ASN.

> > Further, the ROA signature chain is cryptographically valid.

> > 2. Invalid ? The route matches a ROA, but either the ROA

> signature fails

> > validation or the Origin ASN does not match or the prefix length is

> longer

> > than the specified maximum.

> > 3. Not Found/Unknown ? The route does not match a ROA

> >

> > Note that a prefix which is shorter than an intersecting ROA is

> considered

> > not to match. See table below for details on how this works out:

> >

> >

> > ROA Prefix

> > MAX Length

> > Origin AS

> > Received Prefix

> > Origin AS

> > Result

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 24

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 64498

> > Invalid

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 24

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.0/28

> > 64498

> > Invalid

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 24

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 65550

> > Valid

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 24

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.0/28

> > 65550

> > Invalid

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/28

> > 28

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 64498

> > Unknown

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/28

> > 28

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 65550

> > Unknown

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/28

> > 28

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.0/28

> > 64498

> > Invalid

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/28

> > 28

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.0/28

> > 65550

> > Valid

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 24

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.64/26

> > 65550

> > Invalid

> >

> > 192.0.2.0/24

> > 28

> > 65550

> > 192.0.2.64/26

> > 65550

> > Valid

> >

> >

> >> Finally I dont think it will be a nice idea allowing resource holders

> to

> >> create AS0 ROA as I think this scenario might increase the issue of

> >> invalid prefixes in the routing tables.

> >

> > This proposal does not allow resource holders to create AS0 ROAs. It

> expects

> > AfriNIC to create AS0 ROAs for space which is within AfriNIC

> administration,

> > but which is not currently issued.

> >

>

> ...i think the following portion of the [1] text explains the concerns

> raised by Paschal :

>

> ?[...] Any resource holder can create AS0 (zero) ROAs for the

> resources they have

> under their account/administration.

>

> An RPKI ROA is a positive attestation that a prefix holder has

> authorized an Autonomous System to originate a route for this prefix

> to the global BGP routing table. An RPKI ROA for the same prefixes

> with AS0 (zero) origin shows a negative intent from the resource

> holder to have the prefixes advertised in the global BGP routing

> table. [...]?

> __

> [1]: <https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-006-d1/amp>

>

> >

> > I hope that clarifies the situation.

> >

>

> ...not sure, but you did more for most of the participants, in

> promoting RPKI (Resource Public Key Infrastructure), ROA (Route Origin

> Autorisation) and ROV (RPKI-based route Origin Validation). So,

> validate and drop non-valid routes...

>

> IMHO, what would clarify is to :

>

> ??/

> ?'drop'/remove that portion of the text :-)

> ? (eventually) create a sub-section to provide definitions

> for new concepts. The definition sub-section would remove

> any ambiguity.

> ? (even if i think that this proposal is too much operational)

> simplify the core policy text like this :

> ?1| ?AFRINIC MUST/will create ROAs with origin AS0 for all

> the unallocated and unassigned address space (IPv4 & IPv6)

> for which it is the current administrator.?

> ?2| (i prefer this less operational version) ?AFRINIC MUST/will

> flag/mark all the unused (unallocated & unassigned) address

> space (IPv4 & IPv6) for which it is the current administrator.

> In order to render its unused address space unsquattable

> in a global secured routing context.?

> ? ...

> ??\

>

> The difference with my version (2|) is that it's more agnostic

> (technologcally/operationally speaking) and portable then it

> could (probably) more easily pass in all RIRs with the same

> text. To be proposed as a global policy : final/first goal of the

> authors :-)

>

> ...to be clearer, i prefer ?resource? rather than ?address space? ;-)

>

> Shalom,

> --sb.

>

> >

> > Owen

> >

> >>

> >> On Tuesday, November 5, 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD

> >> <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> wrote:

> >> Hi Sylvain,

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> El 5/11/19 6:11, "Sylvain Baya" <abscoco at gmail.com

> >> <mailto:abscoco at gmail.com>> escribi?:

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Hi all,

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Hope you are doing well.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Please comments below (inline)...

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Le mardi 5 novembre 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net

> >> <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> a ?crit :

> >>

> >> Hi all,

> >>

> >> [...]

> >> This is the list of new policy proposals (note that the numbering can be

> >> modified by the staff when published).

> >>

> >> 1) AFPUB-2019-IPv6-002-DRAFT01: "Adjusting IPv6 PA Policy"

> >> Solves a discrepancy between IPv6 PI and IPv6 PA regarding the

> >> announcement of aggregated addressing space.

> >>

> >> 2) AFPUB-2019-GEN-003-DRAFT01: "Chairs Elections Process"

> >> Including in the CPM a detailed procedure for the chair's elections.

> >>

> >> 3) AFPUB-2019-GEN-004-DRAFT01: "M&A Resource Transfers"

> >> Including in the CPM intra-RIR M&A for ASN, IPv4 and IPv6.

> >>

> >> 4) AFPUB-2019-GEN-005-DRAFT01: "Impact Analysis is Mandatory"

> >>

> >> 5) AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT01: "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned

> >> AFRINIC Address Space"

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> ...i like this one. I recall that i was thinking ok how to solve the

> >> problem of 'Internet resources

> >>

> >> squatting'. I was naively imagining a solution where a RIR will have to

> >> flag all their

> >>

> >> unallocated|unassigned Address Space ; via a particular attribute of the

> >> IRR (Internet Routing

> >>

> >> Registry). Now i understand that i was not too dummy or even crazy :-)

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Oh no! In that case the crazy one is me :-) !

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Please send me your DPP (Draft Policy Proposal), i can not wait more to

> >> review it ;-)

> >>

> >> Thanks.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> I was thinking in sending them in order (2 more today, 2 more tomorrow),

> >> but as you have interest in this one. My next one will be this one, I

> >> promise! Give me first a few minutes to respond to all the emails I got

> >> till now ?

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Shalom,

> >>

> >> --sb.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Updated policy proposals:

> >>

> >> a) AFPUB-2019-ASN-001-DRAFT03: "Multihoming not required for ASN"

> >>

> >> b) AFPUB-2019-IPv4-002-DRAFT02: "IPv4 Inter-RIR Resource Transfers

> >> (Comprehensive Scope)"

> >>

> >> c) AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT04: "Abuse Contact Policy Update"

> >>

> >> Regards,

> >> Jordi

> >> @jordipalet

> >>

> >> [...]

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> --

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> --

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Best Regards !

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Sylvain BAYA

> >>

> >> cmNOG's Co-Founder & Coordinator

> >>

> >> (+237) 677005341

> >>

> >> PO Box 13107 YAOUNDE / CAMEROON

> >>

> >> baya.sylvain [AT cmNOG DOT cm]

> >>

> >> abscoco2001 [AT yahoo DOT fr]

> >>

> >> http://www.cmnog.cm <http://www.cmnog.cm/>

> >> https://cmnog.wordpress.com <https://cmnog.wordpress.com/>

> >> ************************

> >>

> >> ?#?LASAINTEBIBLE(?#?Romains15:33):"Que LE ?#?DIEU de ?#?Paix soit avec

> >> vous tous!?#?Amen!"

> >>

> >> ?#?MaPri?re est que tu naisses de nouveau.

> >>

> >> ?#?Chr?tiennement

> >>

> >> ? Comme une biche soupire apr?s des courants d?eau, Ainsi

> mon

> >> ?me soupire apr?s toi, ? DIEU! ? (Psaumes 42 :2)

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list

> >> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

> >> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

> >> **********************************************

> >> IPv4 is over

> >> Are you ready for the new Internet ?

> >> http://www.theipv6company.com <http://www.theipv6company.com/>

> >> The IPv6 Company

> >>

> >> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or

> >> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of

> >> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized

> >> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this

> >> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly

> >> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the

> >> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution

> or

> >> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including

> >> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal

> >> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this

> >> communication and delete it.

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >> RPD mailing list

> >> RPD at afrinic.net

> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

> >

> >

>

>

>

> --

> Best Regards !

> baya.sylvain [AT cmNOG DOT cm] | <https://www.cmnog.cm> |

> <https://survey.cmnog.cm>

> Subscribe to Mailing List : <

> https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/>

> __

> #?LASAINTEBIBLE?|?#?Romains15?:33?*Que LE ?#?DIEU? de ?#?Paix? soit avec

> vous tous! ?#?Amen?!*?

> ?#?MaPri?re? est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chr?tiennement?

> ?*Comme une biche soupire apr?s des courants d?eau, ainsi mon ?me soupire

> apr?s TOI, ? DIEU!*? (#Psaumes42:2)

>

>

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Message: 2

> Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2020 11:05:58 +0100

> From: Daniel Yakmut <yakmutd at googlemail.com>

> To: Paschal Ochang <pascosoft at gmail.com>, "rpd >> AfriNIC Resource

> Policy" <rpd at afrinic.net>

> Subject: Re: [rpd] New policy proposals and updated ones - RPKI-ROAs

> Message-ID: <af4aee1c-37a2-fd08-1672-e4b02f124de5 at gmail.com>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

>

> The current state of RPKI infrastructure, does not provide a sufficient

> period between revocation of ROA and notification that a given prefix

> has been allocated to an organization, which can impact considerably on

> allocations. Except we can be able to provide a sufficient period or

> create a different procedure, the proposal for the RPKI-ROAs does not fly.

>

> On 30/12/2019 6:12 pm, Paschal Ochang wrote:

> > Yes in a way.

> >

> > On Monday, December 30, 2019, Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com

> > <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>> wrote:

> >

> > On 30/12/2019 11:38, Paschal Ochang wrote:

> >>

> >> It is suggested to always drop invalid announcements, rather than

> >> applying a lower preference. This is because sub-prefix

> >> hijackings would be still possible if invalids are accepted and

> >> this would go against the purpose of RPKI validation. However? I

> >> think the text should state how invalids should be dropped in

> >> order not to trigger loosing connectivity.

> >

> > If I understand correctly what you are willing to say, no proposal

> > should have on the text a way Autonomous Systems must treat

> > announcements they receive as it's their own decision. Some may

> > decide to drop what is recommended and some might just lower

> > preference at their own discretion right ?

> >

> >

> >>

> >>

> >> On Tuesday, November 5, 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD

> >> <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> wrote:

> >>

> >> Hi Sylvain,

> >>

> >> El 5/11/19 6:11, "Sylvain Baya" <abscoco at gmail.com

> >> <mailto:abscoco at gmail.com>> escribi?:

> >>

> >> Hi all,

> >>

> >> Hope you are doing well.

> >>

> >> Please comments below (inline)...

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Le mardi 5 novembre 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD

> >> <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> a ?crit?:

> >>

> >> Hi all,

> >>

> >> [...]

> >> This is the list of new policy proposals (note that the

> >> numbering can be modified by the staff when published).

> >>

> >> 1) AFPUB-2019-IPv6-002-DRAFT01: "Adjusting IPv6 PA Policy"

> >> Solves a discrepancy between IPv6 PI and IPv6 PA

> >> regarding the announcement of aggregated addressing space.

> >>

> >> 2) AFPUB-2019-GEN-003-DRAFT01: "Chairs Elections Process"

> >> Including in the CPM a detailed procedure for the chair's

> >> elections.

> >>

> >> 3) AFPUB-2019-GEN-004-DRAFT01: "M&A Resource Transfers"

> >> Including in the CPM intra-RIR M&A for ASN, IPv4 and IPv6.

> >>

> >> 4) AFPUB-2019-GEN-005-DRAFT01: "Impact Analysis is

> Mandatory"

> >>

> >> 5) AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT01: "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated

> >> and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space"

> >>

> >> ...i like this one. I recall that i was thinking ok how to

> >> solve the problem of 'Internet resources

> >>

> >> squatting'. I was naively imagining a solution where a RIR

> >> will have to flag all their

> >>

> >> unallocated|unassigned Address Space ; via a particular

> >> attribute of the IRR (Internet Routing

> >>

> >> Registry). Now i understand that i was not too dummy or even

> >> crazy :-)

> >>

> >> Oh no! In that case the crazy one is me :-) !

> >>

> >> Please send me your DPP (Draft Policy Proposal), i can not

> >> wait more to review it ;-)

> >>

> >> Thanks.

> >>

> >> I was thinking in sending them in order (2 more today, 2 more

> >> tomorrow), but as you have interest in this one. My next one

> >> will be this one, I promise! Give me first a few minutes to

> >> respond to all the emails I got till now ?

> >>

> >> Shalom,

> >>

> >> --sb.

> >>

> >> Updated policy proposals:

> >>

> >> a) AFPUB-2019-ASN-001-DRAFT03: "Multihoming not required

> >> for ASN"

> >>

> >> b) AFPUB-2019-IPv4-002-DRAFT02: "IPv4 Inter-RIR Resource

> >> Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)"

> >>

> >> c) AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT04: "Abuse Contact Policy Update"

> >>

> >> Regards,

> >> Jordi

> >> @jordipalet

> >>

> >> [...]

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> --

> >>

> >> --

> >>

> >> ?Best Regards !

> >>

> >> Sylvain BAYA

> >>

> >> ?cmNOG's Co-Founder & Coordinator

> >>

> >> ?(+237) 677005341

> >>

> >> ?PO Box 13107 YAOUNDE / CAMEROON

> >>

> >> baya.sylvain [AT cmNOG DOT cm]

> >>

> >> ?abscoco2001 [AT yahoo DOT fr]

> >>

> >> http://www.cmnog.cm

> >>

> >> https://cmnog.wordpress.com

> >>

> >> ?************************

> >>

> >> ?#?LASAINTEBIBLE(?#?Romains15:33):"Que LE ?#?DIEU de ?#?Paix

> >> soit avec vous tous!?#?Amen!"

> >>

> >> ?#?MaPri?re est que tu naisses de nouveau.

> >>

> >> ?#?Chr?tiennement

> >>

> >> ? ? ? ? ? ?? Comme une biche soupire apr?s des courants

> >> d?eau, Ainsi mon ?me soupire apr?s toi, ? DIEU! ? (Psaumes 42

> :2)

> >>

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing

> >> list RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

> >> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

> >>

> >>

> >> **********************************************

> >> IPv4 is over

> >> Are you ready for the new Internet ?

> >> http://www.theipv6company.com

> >> The IPv6 Company

> >>

> >> This electronic message contains information which may be

> >> privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be

> >> for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and

> >> further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,

> >> distribution or use of the contents of this information, even

> >> if partially, including attached files, is strictly

> >> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you

> >> are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,

> >> copying, distribution or use of the contents of this

> >> information, even if partially, including attached files, is

> >> strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense,

> >> so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this

> >> communication and delete it.

> >>

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >> RPD mailing list

> >> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

> >

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > RPD mailing list

> > RPD at afrinic.net

> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL: <

> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200104/a1cf786d/attachment.html

> >

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Subject: Digest Footer

>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>

>

> ------------------------------

>

> End of RPD Digest, Vol 160, Issue 5

> ***********************************

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200104/66cf310d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the RPD mailing list