[rpd] End of LAST call

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

There is no delay in allocation/assignment at all.

A possible delay is that you get allocated "today at 13:00" hours and you want to announce it one minute after that (which seems difficult to believe!). You will need to wait for 24 hours, or the period of time that the implementation decides.

However, this is not "normal". I'm sure that if you investigate the average delay between an allocation/assignment and the announcement, typically it is several weeks if not months.

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 1/2/20 22:47, "Daniel Yakmut via RPD" <rpd at afrinic.net> escribió:

    To response to your questions,
    
    
    at least I will like to see about 24 hours, which will be minimally 
    impactful, but the current infrastructure does not allow this small 
    amount of time.
    
    The impact I possibly see is the delay in allocation.
    
    
    Simply,
    
    Danile
    
    On 31/01/2020 7:34 am, Frank Habicht wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > On 31/01/2020 08:51, Daniel Yakmut via RPD wrote:
    >> 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.
    > I would like to get more specific information:
    >
    > 1. According to you, Daniel: how much time does the "current state of
    > RPKI" provide between revocation of ROA and notification that a given
    > prefix has been allocated to an organization?
    >
    > 2. How much time would you consider "sufficient"?
    >
    > 3. which impact on allocations to you see?
    >
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Frank
    > (co-author)
    >
    >> 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
    >> _______________________________________________
    >> 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.