Dear all,
I'm happy to see the proposal has been updated, I think it'll make
discussion easier.
I have some questions:
1/ How much trouble are those ~ 100 prefixes actually causing the
community? I'm sure we all agree that its not fair that these
entities are announcing space that wasn't assigned / allocated to
them; and probably not paying the bill either... and it would be
cool if those 100 prefixes can be assigned to elgible end users
through the normal process; but that's not worth infinite effort.
1a/ What does APNIC currently do to 'reclaim' or 'clean up' space that
APNIC would like to assign to an eligible enduser, but is currently
being announce by some unrelated third party? What is today's
process?
1b/ Why should it be APNIC itself that makes the ROAs for unassigned
space? Perhaps the process should remain as-is: APNIC assigns space
to an enduser, and the enduser themselves can create a ROA if they
need to 'reclaim' the space. Using ROAs to supress rogue
announcements is great, but this mechanism can be used either before
and after assignment. I think the answer to this question in part
will derive from how we feel about (1) and what APNIC does in (1a).
2/ Has the community considered whether this proposal should be
implemented under the current 'production' APNIC TAL, or perhaps a
new TAL should be instantiated (let's call it the "APNIC-UNASSIGNED
TAL"). An advantage of using a separate TAL is that may address
some concerns about the RIRs operational involvement in routing.
Operators would need to explicitly opt-in into receiving ROAs for
the unassigned/reserved space.
Kind regards,
Job
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
