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

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,

*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
sig-policy mailing list

Reply via email to