Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] REPORT ON Appeal against the non-consensus determination on proposal AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT02 (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space ? Draft 2).

Ibeanusi Elvis ibeanusielvis at
Mon Feb 1 13:47:38 UTC 2021

Dear Jordi,

First, to make it clear, I am not in support of the policy.

In accordance with my earlier email, I was not aiming to suggest that the provision of RPKI should be stopped not stop the provision through the Whois and other DB’s the necessary information about legitimate resource holders for each address block but rather I was stipulating on the flexibility and independence of choice that the presence of the RPKI gives the resource holders.

Although the RPKI might not be mandatory but it is essential to have as it provides a verification of internet number resource. On the other hand, concerning the issue of a “healthy network”, were you trying to say that the current RPKI+ASO that the AFRINIC organization utilizes does not provide and promote a healthy network? And if network companies or organizations want to use use RPKI+ASO and want to have a healthy network, they have to run a manual filtering?


> On Feb 1, 2021, at 17:45, Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at> wrote:


> On 31 Jan 2021, at 03:52, Paschal Ochang <pascosoft at> wrote:


>> Hello all,

>> From my own point of view I do think this should be available in a consented form and optional form.


> it. already. is.


> the “economic” argument is fallacious; if you are an ISP and can’t afford to setup a RP cache (ie. a virtual machine with 1GB of RAM), there are many public validators you can use. in my community, i operate six (6) free-to-use caches; this is a zero-dollar cost to operators. discussing RP cache setup and use, is outside the scope of this policy.


> —n.


> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at


More information about the RPD mailing list