Responding to Secretariat questions.

> Clarifications required:
> 1. Since the route management interface in MyAPNIC (Member Portal)
> permits Members to create both route objects and ROAs
> with arbitrary ASNs, should this proposal be extended to include
> restricting of AS-ID in route objects as well?
>

Yes. It should be uniform for both route objects and ROAs. Currently, APNIC
restricts the creation of route-objects with "Reserved" ASNs using whois
update panel but allows the same using ROA creation panel.


> 2. Does this proposal requires the deletion of all existing ROAs
> referencing unallocated, private, and reserved ASNs?
>

ROAs already created should be revoked.

Another point raised during yesterday's discussion. Whether there is a need
to have a policy or guideline would be enough. I'm fine either way and
leave this on community consensus.

I will submit an updated version with the same statement in it.

>
> Regards,
> Sunny
>
> On 13/08/2021 9:58 am, Bertrand Cherrier wrote:
> > Dear SIG members,
> >
> > The proposal "prop-138-v001: Restricting AS-ID in ROA" has been
> > sent to the Policy SIG for review.
> >
> > It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting (OPM) at APNIC 52
> > on Thursday, 16 September 2021.
> >
> >
> https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fconference.apnic.net%2F52%2Fprogram%2Fschedule%2F%23%2Fday%2F4&data=04%7C01%7C%7Cbafa554ae97d4bc47b7008d95ded0f93%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637644095039717635%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=0g1ckVVVxjWuI8efLzNSHLehu%2Bbu2cD5DwSFzgjsHmY%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
> > We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing
> > list before the OPM.
> >
> > The comment period on the mailing list before the OPM is an important
> > part of the Policy Development Process (PDP). We encourage you to
> > express your views on the proposal:
> >
> >   - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
> >   - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
> >     tell the community about your situation.
> >   - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
> >   - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
> >   - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
> > effective?
> >
> > Information about this proposal is appended below and also available at:
> >
> >
> https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apnic.net%2Fpolicy%2Fproposals%2Fprop-138&data=04%7C01%7C%7Cbafa554ae97d4bc47b7008d95ded0f93%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637644095039717635%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=wbpAlgDbnl7%2FAPD5c2odGyVRKC83KeO%2F4T9BrgF9U%2FE%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bertrand and Ching-Heng
> > APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > prop-138-v001: Restricting AS-ID in ROA
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Proposer: Aftab Siddiqui ([email protected])
> >
> >
> > 1. Problem statement
> > --------------------
> > RFC6482 - A Profile for Route Origin Authorisations (ROAs) defines the
> > content of a ROA and one of the field is called "asID" Autonomous
> > System Identifier. It is defined in the RFC as "The asID field
> > contains the AS number that is authorised to originate routes to the
> > given IP address prefixes."
> >
> > asID is an Integer value and the RFC doesn't restrict the range of
> > numbers which can be placed here but technically only allocated ASNs
> > should only be allowed to be added as "asID" or "Origin AS". APNIC ROA
> > management system allows any number between 0 - 4294967295, which
> > includes many ranges of Private ASNs, Reserved ASNs and unallocated
> > ASNs as well. This may lead to creating ROAs with Origin AS which
> > should not be in the global routing table.
> >
> >
> > 2. Objective of policy change
> > -----------------------------
> > Restrict APNIC members to create ROAs with private, reserved or
> > unallocated ASN.
> >
> >
> > 3. Situation in other regions
> > -----------------------------
> > In process of verifying this information.
> >
> >
> > 4. Proposed policy solution
> > ---------------------------
> > Route Origin Authorisation (ROA) is an RPKI object signed by a prefix
> > holder authorising origination of said prefix from an origin AS
> > specified in said ROA. It verifies whether an AS is authorised to
> > announce a specific IP prefix or not. ROA contains 3 mandatory fields
> >
> > Prefix, Origin AS and Maxlength.
> >
> > Prefix: The prefix you would like to originate from the specified ASN.
> > IPv4 and IPv6 Prefixes listed under "Internet Resources" on My APNIC
> > portal can be only be used here.
> >
> > Origin AS: The authorised ASN which can originate the "Prefix". The
> > origin AS can only be from the IANA specified range and MUST not
> > contain an ASN from:
> >
> > - 23456        # AS_TRANS RFC6793
> > - 64496-64511    # Reserved for use in docs and code RFC5398
> > - 64512-65534    # Reserved for Private Use RFC6996
> > - 65535        # Reserved RFC7300
> > - 65536-65551    # Reserved for use in docs and code RFC5398
> > - 65552-131071    # Reserved
> > - 4200000000-4294967294    # Reserved for Private Use RFC6996
> > - 4294967295    # Reserved RFC7300
> >
> > And any IANA unallocated ASN.
> >
> >
> > 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> > -----------------------------
> > Advantages:
> > This will help APNIC members avoid mistakenly creating unnecessary
> > Bogon ROAs.
> >
> >
> > Disadvantages:
> > Overhead in implementing Origin AS check.
> >
> >
> > 6. Impact on resource holders
> > -----------------------------
> > APNIC has to request members to delete existing Bogon ROAs, as of 5th
> > August 2021 there are around 30+ Bogon ROAs of APNIC delegated resources.
> >
> >
> > 7. References
> > -------------
> > None.
> > *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management
> > policy           *
> > _______________________________________________
> > sig-policy mailing list
> > [email protected]
> >
> https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailman.apnic.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fsig-policy&data=04%7C01%7C%7Cbafa554ae97d4bc47b7008d95ded0f93%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637644095039717635%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=SzrZsXvMGCFWE6E%2FLzOcrIX%2FvMeA9cTwZN3wqPoXEWs%3D&reserved=0
>
> --
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi
> Senior Advisor - Policy and Community Development
>
> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) |  Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
> PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia  |  Fax: +61 7 3858 3199
> 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD          |  http://www.apnic.net
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>    *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to