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

[Nishal Goburdhan]

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 :-))

-n.