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.

Meriem Dayday meriemdayday at gmail.com
Thu Jul 22 09:07:10 UTC 2021


Hello all,

I am sending my updated appeal against the consensus declared by the
co-chairs on the RPKI Policy. I incorporated some new elements for the AC
and the chairs to take into account.

I hope that this updated appeal will be taken into consideration.


Best regards.


Le jeu. 22 juil. 2021 à 09:54, Meriem Dayday <meriemdayday at gmail.com> a
écrit :


> Dear PDWG co-chairs,

>

>

> I would like to remind you that there is still an ongoing appeal against

> the implementation of the RPKI policy, of which we did not get the results.

> It is our right as a community to file an appeal, and more importantly to

> receive a proper final evaluation from the appeal committee (although it

> got dissolved, we are still waiting for its reconstitution, hence, the

> announcement of the appeal results).

> I must say, this behavior violates the CPM and displays a huge disregard

> of the community’s opinion.

>

> We are awaiting AFRINIC's clarification on that serious matter.

>

>

> Best regards.

>

> Le mer. 21 juil. 2021 à 18:43, PDWG Chair <dacostadarwin at gmail.com> a

> écrit :

>

>> Dear AFRINIC PDWG,

>>

>> This is to announce closure of the last call period for the proposal “RPKI

>> ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space”,

>> AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT03.

>>

>> The discussions in the RPD mailing list during the Last Call period have

>> been considered and the concerns raised by the PDWG having been addressed.

>> The Co-chairs uphold the consensus status that was reported after the last

>> AFRINIC-33 Public Policy Meeting.

>>

>> As the PDWG Chairs, we will shortly send a report to the Board for

>> ratification.

>>

>> Thank you for your participation in this process.

>>

>> Regards,

>> Vincent Ngundi & Darwin Da Costa

>> AFRINIC PDWG CO-CHAIRS.

>>

>>

>> On 17 Jun 2021, at 17:17, PDWG Chair <dacostadarwin at gmail.com> wrote:

>>

>> Dear PDWG,

>>

>> We hereby extend the Last Call period for this draft policy proposal by

>> two weeks to *Saturday 3rd July 2021 at 2359UTC.*

>>

>> This will allow the following:

>>

>> 1. The AFRINIC Secretariat to respond to the operational/implementation

>> concerns that have been raised by the PDWG. This will be done on or before

>> Wednesday 23rd June 2021.

>>

>> 2. Thereafter, give the PDWG time to review the response from the AFRINIC

>> Secretariat and further engage on the same, among other resultant matters.

>>

>> Regards,

>> Vincent Ngundi & Darwin Da Costa

>> AFRINIC PDWG CO-CHAIRS

>>

>>

>>

>> On 8 Jun 2021, at 15:58, PDWG Chair <vincent at ngundi.me.ke> wrote:

>>

>> Dear PDWG,

>>

>> Following the commencement of the Last Call period on 5th June 2021, we

>> have noted some concerns that have been raised by some members of the PDWG.

>> As Co-Chairs, and following a review and analysis of the responses, we have

>> concluded that all the concerns raised have been adequately addressed by

>> either the authors of this policy proposal, or by other members of the PDWG.

>>

>> We therefore encourage participants to engage in, and pursue, any

>> editorial changes to the policy proposal as well as any contentious issues

>> that are objective and founded on proper justifications.

>>

>> We also remind the community to adhere to the AfriNIC Code of Conduct (

>> https://www.afrinic.net/code) in order to ensure that our deliberations

>> remain professional, respectful and appropriate at all times.

>>

>> Finally, we wish to inform the PDWG that the Last Call period closes on

>> 19th June 2021 at 2359UTC.

>>

>> Regards,

>> Vincent Ngundi & Darwin Da Costa

>> AFRINIC PDWG CO-Chairs

>>

>> On 08/06/2021 16:21, jeffery_sky via RPD wrote:

>>

>> Hello,

>> To clarify, these concerns are becoming repetitive due to the lack of

>> adequate responses from the concerned stakeholders. Also, I want to address

>> the fact that the real problem here is not RPKI in any way. What is

>> really bothering me is that *RIR is injecti**ng its own data into RPKI*,

>> which makes the previous argument about how signing space is invalid.Further,

>> the usage of RPKI will lead toAS0 all unallocated space for you.

>> Consequently, the routing changes.

>> I understand that some of these concerns are repeated, but I think it is

>> because they were not addressed properly. The responses provided are

>> mainly vague and it seems to me that you are dodging the comments by

>> bringing the Last call phase procedure and calling out the PDWG co-chairs.

>>

>> The last call phase is dedicated to this type of discussions, and if

>> several people are not convinced, it simply means that the co-authors

>> should try providing insightful responses that go straight to the point,

>> not vague ones. If this vicious cycle and the lack of proper answers

>> continues, consensus will never happen, and the policy cannot be

>> implemented. Also, most of the raised objections have nothing to do with

>> technicalities, therefore, they are meant to be discussed on the RPD. Finally,

>> the arguments you perceive repeated, have not been received accurate

>> replies, which means they will keep popping out. Consequently, the best

>> thing to do, is to dig deeper in this proposal, instead of labelling the

>> arguments as invalid.In the hope of receiving insightful answers...

>>

>> Best.

>>

>>

>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021, 9:40:10 PM GMT+9, Fernando Frediani

>> <fhfrediani at gmail.com> <fhfrediani at gmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>

>> +1

>>

>> Excelent and simple answer.

>>

>> Em 6/8/2021 3:01 AM, Frank Habicht escreveu:

>> > Hi

>> >

>> > On 08/06/2021 01:45, Daniel Yakmut via RPD wrote:

>> >> Hi,

>> >>

>> >> Are you postulating here that Resources not allocated are susceptible

>> to

>> >> hijack?

>> > - resources are susceptible to hijack.

>> > - if a ROA with AS0 was published for an unallocated resource, it would

>> > be less susceptible to hijack.

>> >

>> >

>> >> My other understanding is an RIR is a resource dispenser.

>> > When I get my next resource from AfriNIC, I will prefer one that was not

>> > previously hijacked and used for spamming and network abuse, and got

>> > blacklisted and a bad reputation everywhere.

>> >

>> > What about you?

>> >

>> >

>> > Thanks,

>> > Frank

>> >

>> >

>> >> Simply

>> >> Daniel

>> >>

>> >> On Mon, Jun 7, 2021, 11:30 PM Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com

>> >> <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>> wrote:

>> >>

>> >> AfriNic (or any other RIR) is the resource holder for IP space

>> that

>> >> IANA has allocated to it. So who else could secure that space

>> until

>> >> it is assigned to an organization issuing ROAs if not the current

>> >> resource holder ?

>> >>

>> >> Must we have a policy accepted by either RIPE or ARIN first in

>> order

>> >> to accept it in AfriNic afterwards ?

>> >> This is not a worry to the RIR, it is actually an additional

>> >> guarantee that no one else will try to make usage of IP space

>> under

>> >> its responsability.

>> >>

>> >> Fernando

>> >>

>> >> On 07/06/2021 19:14, Daniel Yakmut via RPD wrote:

>> >>> Dear Jordi,

>> >>>

>> >>> Just out of curiosity why has RIPE and ARIN refused to adopt the

>> >>> RPKI ROA and make it their responsibility that it is used by

>> >>> resource holder?. I will agree that RPKI ROA is a good tool to

>> >>> secure BGP routing, however I don't see as the responsibility of

>> >>> an RIR to implement it.

>> >>>

>> >>> My strong opinion is that any resource holder should be

>> >>> responsible for securing its resources and if RPKI ROA is the

>> best

>> >>> way to prevent hijack, then it will enjoy patronage. Making it a

>> >>> job of AfriNIC, will possibly be going over board.

>> >>>

>> >>> Responding to my opening question, I believe RIPE and ARIN are

>> not

>> >>> keen on accepting your arguments because they are mundane. This

>> >>> means resource holders should handle this issue, without making

>> it

>> >>> a worry of the RIR.

>> >>>

>> >>> In this regard, AfriNIC should concentrate on handling other more

>> >>> important issues, hence this policy is not relevant.

>> >>>

>> >>>

>> >>> Simply

>> >>>

>> >>> Daniel

>> >>>

>> >>> On 07/06/2021 6:3pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:

>> >>>> Ni Mimi,____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> No, is not ideological, the legal counsel already confirmed the

>> >>>> being bookkeepers has many other **related** implications, such

>> >>>> as provide a trustable source of accurate data, and this is what

>> >>>> RPKI and AS0 improve.____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> The fact that in RIPE has not been accepted yet is just one more

>> >>>> excuse, if you compare it with the fact that the other TWO RIRs

>> >>>> where it has been submitted (APNIC and LACNIC) accepted it and

>> in

>> >>>> none of those regions there have been any of the excuses and

>> lack

>> >>>> of knowledge about RPKI that we are hearing here. As I’ve

>> >>>> explained already, I don’t think the RIPE chairs decision was

>> >>>> correct, and we will make sure to resubmit the proposal there

>> >>>> once a consistent appeal process is available, in case chairs

>> >>>> take again a wrong decision. Also, then the experience in APNIC,

>> >>>> LACNIC and AFRINIC will show that those motivations are

>> >>>> ridiculous.____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> From time to time is good that ARIN and RIPE aren’t the leaders,

>> >>>> you don’t think so? It shows that very smart people exist in

>> >>>> other regions as well!____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> Once more, sometimes policies in one or the other region fail to

>> >>>> reach consensus, but it happens sooner or later.____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> If you have a simple and trustable tool such as RPKI to drop

>> >>>> invalids, you have a better way (if you want) to avoid bad

>> actors

>> >>>> to use prefixes that don’t belong to them as they are still on

>> >>>> the hands of AFRINIC. This is just facts. Not ideological, not

>> >>>> opinions or personal view points. So yes, AS0 avoids, if you

>> >>>> operate your network in a consistent way, to be faked with

>> >>>> prefixes not allocated/assigned by AFRINIC, and thus helps to

>> >>>> prevent hijacking.____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> Regards,____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> Jordi____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> @jordipalet____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> El 7/6/21 18:47, "Mimi dy" <dym5328 at gmail.com

>> >>>> <mailto:dym5328 at gmail.com>> escribió:____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> __ __

>> >>>>

>> >>>> Dear WG,____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> ____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> I think the issue here is ideological. Many people believe that

>> >>>> RIRs are mere bookkeepers, and it is not in their mandate to

>> >>>> inject data into the routing database. That is the reason why

>> >>>> RIPE did not approve a similar proposal, which I totally agree

>> >>>> with. Moreover, I wanted to react to Jordi’s statement, saying

>> >>>> that these objections are based on practical and technical

>> >>>> matters. There is not only one routing database, there are many,

>> >>>> isn’t it kind of messy? And that is not even the main reason why

>> >>>> I object to this policy. ____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> From another perspective, since people can adjust and control

>> >>>> their routers, can you precise how this policy can potentially

>> >>>> prevent/ reduce hijacking?____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> ____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> Best.____

>> >>>>

>> >>>> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list

>> >>>> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

>> >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>> >>>> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd> ____

>> >>>>

>> >>>>

>> >>>> **********************************************

>> >>>> IPv4 is over

>> >>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?

>> >>>> http://www.theipv6company.com <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.

>>

>> >>>>

>> >>>>

>> >>>> _______________________________________________

>> >>>> RPD mailing list

>> >>>> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

>> >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <

>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

>> >>> _______________________________________________

>> >>> RPD mailing list

>> >>> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

>> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <

>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

>> >> _______________________________________________

>> >> RPD mailing list

>> >> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

>> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>> >> <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 listRPD at afrinic.nethttps://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

>>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210722/f1872fb3/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1_RPKI Appeal Final.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 31597 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210722/f1872fb3/attachment-0001.docx>


More information about the RPD mailing list