Hi Christopher,

I disagree.

There is no difference between this proposal and actual assignments that an ISP 
with an APNIC allocations can do.

If ISP A got an APNIC allocation. Then ISP A is doing an assignment to 
customers B, and customer B is acting against the policies, APNIC is perfectly 
entitled to warn the ISP A and even start a recovery and closure account, 
because it is the responsibility of A to ensure that the policies are followed 
with all their resources.

Regarding ROSE-T, APNIC can just ask for a kind of “certification” with that 
tool, or even work with MANRS in order to facilitate that. There is no need to 
grant external access you just need to see the results.

Regards,
Jordi

@jordipalet


> El 12 ago 2024, a las 16:00, Christopher Hawker <[email protected]> 
> escribió:
> 
> Hello Jordi,
> 
> When the Secretariat completes their review and impact assessment of policy 
> proposals, it would be safe to make the assumption that they would be doing 
> so with regard for Australian law, as it's the jurisdiction in which the 
> Secretariat operates. If the Secretariat has said that if the intention is 
> that they revoke resources used for network abuse they cannot do so under the 
> mentioned provision as they cannot enforce terms of a contract it is not a 
> party to, it is for good reason.
> 
> I do not possess any legal qualifications, so some things here may not be 
> 100% accurate. APNIC recovering resources from the licensee (the organisation 
> which received the initial delegation from APNIC) which they have 
> sub-licensed by way of a temporary transfer to another party as the result of 
> the execution of a contract, may open them up to legal challenges which would 
> not in the interest of APNIC's members.
> 
> Further, there is a tool called ROSE-T (https://github.com/rose-tool/roset) 
> which allows network operators to self-verify that they are MANRS-compliant. 
> For APNIC to verify that an organisation is compliant, it would require them 
> to have access to the member's network in order to verify compliance (e.g. to 
> confirm that packets with spoofed source IP addresses cannot leave the 
> member's network). For network security reasons, many network operators do 
> not grant external access to third-parties.
> 
> I remain opposed to this proposal.
> 
> Regards,
> Christopher H.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or 
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the 
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, 
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if 
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be 
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware 
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this 
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly 
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the 
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

_______________________________________________
SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to