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

[rpd] Last Call - RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT03.

aziz halim azizlfax88 at
Sun Jun 6 17:24:32 UTC 2021

+1 Anthony.

I’d also like to add that this policy should go back to discussion for the
simple reason that it completely misreads the main role of RIRs. More
precisely, and as many individuals have commented on the PPM, RIRs have
nothing to do with the resource routing process, it is safe to say that it
is totally out of their mandate scope. Their one and only mission is to
properly register and allocate number resources to end-users.

Correspondingly, the implementation of this policy will increase the
chances of committing routing errors, which can potentially hinder network
functioning. In fact, AFRINIC staff has a history in committing such
technical mistakes, jeopardizing networks. It is simply not in AFRINIC’s
mandate to inject data into the routing database. Plus, the following
concern that has been raised during the meeting still remains unaddressed :
how does this policy prevents hijacking as it’s intended to do ?

On Sun, Jun 6, 2021, 16:48 Anthony Ubah <ubah.tonyiyke at> wrote:

> Dear PDWG,


> Regarding this policy, I didn't throw my weight on it for one reason.

> There is a gray area which requires clarity and may turn around to hunt

> service providers and resource owner in the long run.

> I directed a question to the Legal team at the hearing of this policy,

> multiple times, and it was inexplicably ignored by Jordi, the Co-chairs and

> perhaps the legal team, and I still sought clarity on it.


> My question remains; In a situation where, due to human or machine error

> AS0 is injected by AFRINIC on already assigned resources, and expectedly

> this result in service disconnection, thus DOS, causing an SLA breach with

> service end users. *Who bears the final brunt for the consequences

> (e.g.poor QoS, fines, revenue cut, and loss of customers), Afrinic or

> resource owner?*


> I still insist this policy isn't ripe, because;

> 1. The Legal team must include this on the impact assessment, clearly

> stating responsibility for liability.

> 2. The policy must include text stating these policies and mitigation

> plans.

> 3. Since it has become a trend to follow other RIRs, why do you think most

> have rejected this policy so far?

> 4. How did the RIRs who have adopted this policy tackled this scenario

> legally?


> *Best Regards,*


> *Anthony Ubah *



> On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 11:00 AM PDWG Chair <dacostadarwin at>

> wrote:


>> Dear PDWG,


>> This is to announce the official start of the last call period for the

>> following policy proposal (in line with the provisions of the CPM):


>> RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space

>> AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT03

>> URL:


>> The proposal reached rough consensus at the Public Policy Meeting held

>> 2-3 June 2021 in online format. This last call period will run for a period

>> of two weeks as a minimum. The closing date will be communicated to the

>> mailing list depending on the feedback received.


>> Regards,

>> PDWG Co-Chairs.


>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at



> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list