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.

Nishal Goburdhan nishal at
Sat Jul 24 15:48:48 UTC 2021

On 22 Jul 2021, at 16:53, Owen DeLong via RPD wrote:


> This was not true. Because of the way they modified whois, multiple

> providers started rejecting LOAs as invalid and disconnecting

> customers.

in my experience it takes quite a lot to (sometimes, even legitimately!)
get an operator to disconnect a client that is paying them. so, i’m
curious; what, specifically, was it about the change of a descriptor
field in whois that caused your clients to start to be disconnected from
their fee-inducing providers? in your answer, i’d like you to focus
on the elements that network operators care about please - we don’t
need any more arm-chair jurors, nor judges.

here’s a short list of things that i would look for (and which are
relevant to discuss here):
# were existing IRR objects removed/replaced?
# were new contradictory IRR objects introduced?
# were existing ROAs revoked/replaced/removed?

afrinic said neither of these were touched. are you saying they lied?
(i admit, i don’t actually know and i would be genuinely horrified if
this were the case)

>> Following the policy text, this is exactly the same thing. If there

>> is a disagreement and then a recovery, until the recovery is

>> “final” (the 3 months I just mention) the resources will not be

>> incorporated in the AS0.


> Yes, but you are now assuming that AFRINIC will follow their own

> rules.

yes. which, is what they appear to do for 99.95% of their membership,
and, have demonstrably done for 15+ years now. and, quite fortunately,
neither you, i, nor anyone else here, *need* to bother to share our
opinion on the 0.05% (1/2000), since there’s a court weighing in on it
now, eh?

(ie. let’s stick - objectively- to resource policy here :-))


More information about the RPD mailing list