[rpd] End of LAST call

[Paschal Ochang]

I think its usually impossible to track all objections raised. It might be
too much of a workload for the cochairs to track objections and map them to
answers to come out with a conclusion. However, just as people here have
said they can request for help. Furthermore, I think the authors can also
assist in doing that during their responses to objections cos it will be
easier to document that way to show a documented addressing of objections
to prove that all has been addressed.

On Friday, January 31, 2020, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
wrote:


> Hi Daniel,

>

>

>

> I did a quick search in the list archive. If you’re referring to this

> email:

>

>

>

> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2020/010280.html

>

>

>

> I’ve responded to it (in less than 2 hours):

>

>

>

> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2020/010282.html

>

>

>

> I think it clearly addresses your points.

>

>

>

> I recall other people also answered afterwards.

>

>

>

>

>

> Regards,

>

> Jordi

>

> @jordipalet

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> El 31/1/20 6:58, "Daniel Yakmut via RPD" <rpd at afrinic.net> escribió:

>

>

>

> 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> <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

>

> _______________________________________________ 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/20200201/39c14166/attachment-0001.html>