On 12/04/2014 07:59, John Curran wrote: > On Dec 4, 2014, at 10:51 AM, David Huberman <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Numerous members of the security and network engineering community and I >> have discussed this over the last 12 months, and the RPA is a show stopper >> for some of us. Paragraphs 3 and 4 are the key. It's one way warranties >> (you -> ARIN), just like the RSA. >> >> It's thorny because if you put yourself in ARIN's shoes for a moment, you >> have to balance the risk of bankrupting the company with the responsibility >> of being a trust anchor. Unfortunately, like many ARIN legal postures, the >> unwillingness to take on any risk at all is problematic. > > Actually, the terms regarding indemnification and warrant disclaimer are > nearly > identical to that contained in the other RIR's RPKI agreements; are those also > problematic, or is the difficultly that principally that ARIN agreeing to the > terms explicit rather than implicit?
I disagree. The only terms I was able to find were APNIC's and they only referred to "Certificates issued by APNIC," not a TAL. So I really don't think there is another TAL RPA out there that's anything like ARIN's. michael _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
