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.

Sun Jun 6 18:26:45 UTC 2021

Hi Aziz,

I’ve responded already to that and Ashok did as well, please see the video if you missed that.

AS0 is a service provided by the RIR to have an easier way to handle information already available in the whois. It is up to each ISP to use it or not. It is in the scope of the RIRs to provide as many services as the community think that they are useful and specially when they follow standards (RFCs).

This is not about “resource routing process”, in fact I’m not sure that’s has any meaning in this context. It is about an alternative and signed way to provide information already available in whois

It is also wrong that the “only mission is to properly register and allocate number resources to end-users”. You’re misunderstanding the way a RIR works. Allocations are done to LIRs. End-users get assignments.

The mission of the RIRs is depicted in ICP-2 but also in their bylaws, and this has been agreed with the membership when AFRINIC was created, and supported by the community. Also, the community can decide what else the RIR should do. Otherwise, 80% of the CPM will go away. All that is in the scope of providing resources (under the rules defined by the community), keeping the registration, and ensuring accuracy, and AS0 is one more way to “display” the accuracy of the data.

For the sake of not repeating myself and not wasting time from all the participants, unless the chairs ask me to do so with every email that opposers send, I’m not going to respond again to the rest of the questions which have already been responded multiple times.

Chairs, if you prefer that I respond 100 times the same even if asked by 100 different people in 100 different ways, please, let me know, I will be happy to do so.

Alternatively, please, if you feel that I’m missing any point, I hope that you can ping me so I do so before the end of the last call (as it has not been pre-defined).




El 6/6/21 19:34, "aziz halim" <azizlfax88 at> escribió:

+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


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.


PDWG Co-Chairs.

RPD mailing list
RPD at

RPD mailing list
RPD at

_______________________________________________ RPD mailing list RPD at

IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
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: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list