Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Last Call - RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space AFPUB-2019-GEN-006-DRAFT03.
amelnaud at gmail.com
Sun Jul 25 15:55:25 UTC 2021
If I recall well we provided you Review Proposal which you fight
But it contains all these provisions. But history give us reason.
Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 12:38, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
a écrit :
> There is today an internal procedure for resource reclamation.
> The community can either, work with the staff (may be via an specific WG)
> in improving that procedure or even better, make it via a policy proposal.
> This way, we can be sure that the de-registration process and all the
> associated "issues" (whois, IRR, ROAs, AS0 ROAs, etc.) follow the patch as
> decided by the community, instead of leaving that in the complete decision
> of AFRINIC.
> If we believe that instead of 3 months before cleaning up in case of
> reclamation, should be, for example:
> - 3 months of warning to resolve any issues
> - 3 months, if no resolution, of publication of what resources will be
> - 1 month after, removal of reverse DNS
> - 1 month after, removal of whois, etc.
> - 1 months after, publication of those resources in the AS0 ROA.
> But all that need to be independent of this proposal, because is affecting
> many other aspects of a reclamation process, it will be making no-sense to
> duplicate it in several places of the CPM.
> And there is already some work on that direction:
> We plan, actually, to send a new version *soon*, so inputs on that are
> welcome! Change the subject please!
> El 24/7/21 18:04, "Nishal Goburdhan" <nishal at controlfreak.co.za>
> On 24 Jul 2021, at 14:48, Ben Maddison via RPD wrote:
> > If you are asking about the process for issuing AS0 ROAs for
> > resources (or previously allocated resources in general), I believe
> > the
> > only safe answer is "once consent has been given by the previous
> > holder".
> that’s *a* safe answer, but certainly not the *only* answer. and
> rather than point to many cases where this is not the the only safe
> answer, i’ll point instead to a suggestion that was made earlier :
> draw up a solid operating practice for when/how this can/should be
> applied. part of that operating policy would likely include something
> like: “if the claim to the address space is being contested in a
> court of law, then no changes should be made to IRR/ROAs..” (that of
> course, needs to be cleaned up, to be made mode appropriate!)
> and so, in a case like we are seeing unfold, a “no change” to the
> state of CI’s ROAs / IRR objects should be the process that’s
> followed, until there’s an answer from the court. frankly, i’m
> unsure why anyone would think different about this? if the court’s
> eventual ruling is in favour of afrinic, then, regardless of whether,
> not CI gives their “consent”, afrinic can act to reclaim the space
> (and follow the relevant associated behaviour). if the court rules in
> favour of CI, well,..this discussion is moot ..
> there’s precedent for this; when we authored the lame delegation
> policy we wrote an operating guide for what we thought would amount to
> safe implementation for afrinic to follow. ben/owen/noah, you’re
> savvy enough to see the value of AS0 ROAs, and to suggest text for
> cases (like this). why not offer to help afrinic author that part of
> the operating manual, so that we end up with the best of both worlds?
> (frankly, i’d see that as a good opportunity to review and comment on
> their regular reclamation process too, but .. i can’t speak for what
> afrinic might be willing to entertain)
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> 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.
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD