<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>+1 to Mark's<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/06/2021 5:49 pm, Mark Tinka
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:0f3d97cf-04ce-f76f-ac83-37985c1c12ca@seacom.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<font face="Tahoma">Hi all.<br>
<br>
TL;DR - I do not support this policy proposal.<br>
<br>
The purpose of this proposal is to give operators another method
to identify routes they should either ignore or filter from
their routing domain. It is, already, feasible to do this using
the data available from the AFRINIC WHOIS database. Implementing
this policy does present the potential to introduce some risk in
the RPKI system operated by AFRINIC. On the basis that the use
of this policy is largely optional, I am not convinced that the
additional risk to the AFRINIC infrastructure - and the folk who
rely on it - outweighs the benefit.<br>
<br>
Getting RPKI out there is already significantly challenging.
Personally, I would spend more time and energy on that, before
we try to complicate it with a policy proposal such as this.<br>
<br>
I am less-than-interested in what the other RIR's have decided
to do or not to do with similar policy proposals within their
regions. Speaking purely with an African bias, I do not see how
this proposal moves the RPKI needle forward in a meaningful and
impactful way. For me, it's a nice-to-have, for which solutions
that are well-documented are already in sufficient existence.
I'd prefer that we did not encourage thought processes that
could turn RPKI into a loaded gun that may very well lead to
unintended consequences.<br>
<br>
Suggest we focus our efforts on actually getting RPKI more
widely deployed. A case of "crawl before we can run",
type-thing. <br>
<br>
I tend to prefer achieving the objective with the least amount
of effort. If it were up to me, the only command a router would
ever need is "on", but alas! Pushing multiple TAL's from a
single RIR will only escalate the confusion surface area, which
is more than likely to have a negative impact on the progression
of deployment of a global RPKI, or worse, mis-deployment that
may be touted as a BCP for generations to come.<br>
<br>
A policy such as this could set a precedent for significantly
more (well-intentioned, but) disastrous use-cases for the RPKI.
I'd err on the side of avoiding situations where centralized
control of gratuitous blackouts of part or all of the Internet,
on purpose or by mistake, are not given roots to emerge. Keeping
the genie in the bottle is, for me, far better than thinking you
can cage it once it has been set free.<br>
<br>
AS0 is unlikely to help me stop paying the annual subscription
for my anti-spam and anti-virus system. If there is some other
practical problem - for which a solution currently does not
exist - that this policy proposal is looking to fix, I'd be most
obliged to hear it. Thanks.<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
</font> <br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>