Search RPD Archives
[rpd] AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT01: "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space"
Anthony Ubah
ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com
Tue Jan 7 15:35:35 UTC 2020
Got it. Thanks for the clarification.
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020, 16:22 Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> RPKI in general involves AfriNIC in the routing process.
>
> This proposal does not significantly expand that.
>
> Without any change in policy, anyone can issue an AS0 ROA for their
> holdings.
>
> This proposal merely creates the ability for AfriNIC to issue AS0 ROAs for
> space which is both under AfriNIC administration and not issued to anyone.
>
> This is a good thing.
>
> It does not create any new opportunities for DOS.
>
> Owen
>
>
> On Jan 6, 2020, at 01:18 , Anthony Ubah <ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Jordi,
>
> An observation. I might be wrong, so correct me if I am.
> From my understanding, if the policy involves AfriNIC in the routing
> process, it is impacting on staff as there must be multiple checks
> post-implementation to mitigate accidental/malicious DOS. In this case,
> don't you think AfriNIC's operational details should also be considered as
> well in certain policies like this which are impacting?
> I'm not abreast of staff impact assessment in the previous presentations,
> so please offer me some clarity.
>
> Finally looking at this from the AfriNIC lens, with our single-digit
> percentile of resource allocation, how effective will this policy be if
> other RIRs with bigger resources don not have an equivalent implementation?
> I think this will only be truly efficient if implemented on a global scope,
> starting from the RIRs with the bulk of resources.
>
> *A Happy New year to everyone*
>
>
> *Best Regards,*
>
> *UBAH ANTHONY*
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 8:53 AM <rpd-request at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>> 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. Re: AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT01: "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated
>> and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space" (JORDI PALET MARTINEZ)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 08:52:20 +0100
>> From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
>> To: <rpd at afrinic.net>
>> Subject: Re: [rpd] AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT01: "RPKI ROAs for
>> Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space"
>> Message-ID: <F8A958E3-701E-43A5-9236-6067083B51C6 at consulintel.es>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi Taiwo,
>>
>>
>>
>> In the policy we don?t talk about specific operational details, such as
>> timing. This up to the staff to set.
>>
>>
>>
>> Human errors are possible even without this policy, right? The
>> implementation should make sure that that doesn?t happen.
>>
>>
>>
>> An human error can make allocated/assigned space to appear back as
>> unnallocated/unnasigned space and given to another member. So this policy
>> doesn?t change that. But of course, there should be sufficient checks in
>> the implementation to avoid that.
>>
>>
>>
>> According to what you say, *any* policy should wait for the
>> implementation so we decide if we agree on the consensus of *not just the
>> policy* but the *implementation as well* ?
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jordi
>>
>> @jordipalet
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> El 6/1/20 7:19, "Taiwo Oyewande" <taiwo.oyewande88 at gmail.com> escribi?:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Are resources reclaimed by Afrinic regarded as bogons, how long after
>> reclaim of such resources will they be given a ROA with origin AS0?
>>
>>
>>
>> What happens in the case of human or machine error in revoking the AS0
>> state. Which can lead to DOS of the resource holder. I think there are some
>> technicalities unresolved that affect the implication of this policy which
>> needs to be looked at before moving forward with this policy
>>
>>
>> On 4 Jan 2020, at 12:40, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kakel,
>>
>>
>>
>> I believe you?re getting it wrong.
>>
>>
>>
>> I can?t see how this proposal has any implications in any government
>> manipulation over Internet. Can you explain it?
>>
>>
>>
>> Remember that to oposse to any proposal, you need to reasonably justifiy
>> your opossition, specially during the last-call, in case something hasn?t
>> been discovered in the previous stage, when the proposal already reached
>> consensus.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jordi
>>
>> @jordipalet
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> El 4/1/20 12:23, "Kakel Mbumb" <kakelmbumb at gmail.com> escribi?:
>>
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
>> Charg? du D?partement 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
>>
>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/KakelMbumb
>>
>> Linked in: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kakel-mbumb-240534ba/
>>
>> Skype: kakel.mbumb1
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Le sam. 4 janv. 2020 ? 12:07, <rpd-request at afrinic.net> a ?crit :
>>
>> 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
>> ***********************************
>>
>> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net 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
>> 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.
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200106/1c079e32/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 15
>> ************************************
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200107/1d51abab/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list