[rpd] End of LAST call

[Daniel Yakmut]

I don't agree with your submission that; "All of the “objections” I saw 
seemed to indicate a clear lack of understanding of RPKI in general and 
the proposal in specific."

I particularly raised a concern "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"

and I did not receive any response from the author(s), I suspect this is 
a concern that is critical and important to possible adoption and 
implementation this proposal

However, I will agree that the author(s) may have been overwhelm with 
the number of "objections" raised and could not keep track of it and 
response, hence I will suggest that the co-chairs could help by 
summarising the objections for the action of the author(s).

Simply.

Dan




On 31/01/2020 3:18 am, Owen DeLong wrote:

> I agree with Nishal, Jordi, and Frank.

>

> All of the “objections” I saw seemed to indicate a clear lack of understanding of RPKI in general and the proposal in specific.

>

> All of them raised concerns that simply don’t fit the facts of what is being proposed.

>

> I did not see any legitimate or critical objections. If there is something I missed, please enumerate it (them) for the edification of the list.

>

> Owen

>

>

>> On Jan 29, 2020, at 03:58 , Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at controlfreak.co.za> wrote:

>>

>> On 29 Jan 2020, at 12:35, ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE wrote:

>>

>>> Dear PDWG,

>>> The following policy proposals have been on the Last call for about 4 weeks

>>> 1.  Multihoming not required for ASN

>>> 2.  Adjusting IPv6 PA Policy

>>> 3. RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space

>>>

>>> However, we received some critical objections that should be addressed on

>>> the policy named  "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address

>>> Space" therefore we believe it requires more discussion.

>> could you enumerate those “critical objections” please.  that would help the authors to fix this for round two.

>> from my perspective, the last series of responses, came from a fundamental misunderstanding of what RPKI is, and how it works.

>>

>> (bear in mind, that it’s not the authors’ - or this list’s - responsibility to explain RPKI ..)

>>

>> -n.

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at afrinic.net

>> 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/20200131/5ec85cc7/attachment.html>