[rpd] AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT01: "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space"

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

I don’t think is good to have operational/implementation details in any policy, unless the staff is doing it wrong (or against the community wishes). I think we first need to trust them.

 

Otherwise we will have this kind of clauses in all the policies …

 

Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet

 

 

 

El 10/1/20 16:06, "Taiwo Oyewande" <taiwo.oyewande88 at gmail.com> escribió:

 

My main concern about this proposal still remains how smooth the implementation can be (automated or manual). I recommend an additional clause be added to the proposal to limit implementation errors such as “timing and wrong route origin authorisation” previously discussed


On 6 Jan 2020, at 08:52, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:

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> escribió:

 

 

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> escribió:

 

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

Twitter: https://twitter.com/KakelMbumb

Linked in: 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
***********************************

_______________________________________________ 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.

_______________________________________________
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/20200110/0447ef10/attachment-0001.html>