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

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

Hi Anthony,

 

Repeating myself. Do we have that for the complete whois in case of any failure?

 

If we want that for every policy (proposal), it should be stated in the CPM. I don’t think it makes a difference, especially when using the AS0 is voluntary.

 

Nobody is “inviting” RIRs into “routing process”. Following your point, is not the complete RPKI system an “invitation into the routing process”? Should that be done by United Nations or ICANN or governments instead of RIRs? Clearly not, is just a service. You decide if you use it or not.

 

If a staff member on purpose is making any illegal acts, in addition to the liability towards AFRINIC, any affected member can take part in that litigation. This is not just for *this* proposal, it is valid for anything being acted in bad faith.

 

Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet

 

 

 

El 6/6/21 19:38, "Anthony Ubah" <ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com> escribió:

 

Hello Frank,

 

 

I'm sure you agree with me that the gray area exists, and also that Legal and the Afrinic assessment committee failed to highlight this risk resource owners are being exposed to.

 

There should be clear understanding of risks and implications, with a signed mutual legal agreement between the Afrinic and the resource holders before this policy is imposed on them(Network operators).

 

An additional risk to consider about inviting RIRs into routing process is the possibility of malicious targeted "errors" which can be perpetrated by compromised members of staff.

How can such acts be put on check, and criminalized?

 

 

Anthony

 

 

 

On Sun, Jun 6, 2021, 12:11 PM Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:

Hi,

On 06/06/2021 18:46, Anthony Ubah wrote:
...> *Who bears the final brunt for the consequences

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

> resource owner?*

> 


To me it seems obvious (but maybe wrong)....
Sure the network operators who decide to turn on validation have to
weigh the risk of themselves doing mistakes as well as others like ROA
publishers doing mistakes.
And when they decide to include information from a Trust-Anchor-Locator
operated by AfriNIC, against your good advise, hmm....
... they might just think that protecting themselves from IP space
hijackers is worth the risk.

I am not a lawyer.

Frank
But I'm a co-author of that policy

_______________________________________________
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/20210606/fd2cd29c/attachment.html>