[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

On 22/03/2019 14:17, Piotr Strzyzewski wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 11:09:24AM +0000, Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg wrote:
>
> Dear Carlos,
>
>>> 8. "So Legacy holders (resources with a legacy status) are for obvious
>>> reasons, excluded for penalties and out of reach. Also according to the
>>> policy that specifies services to Legacy holders, as this policy doesn't
>>> state that it wants to include and impact legacy holders."
>> I don't agree. If you check i was one of the co-authors of 2012-07 :-)
>> In my initial drafts for 2019-03, there was a line about legacy holders. It
>> seems now clear it needs to be recovered for version 2.0 :-)
> Although I have mixed feelings about this policy and haven't made my
> mind yet, I wish you good luck with that one thing.
As a large legacy holder, I do not want to be excluded or exempted from 
this new policy, if accepted.

I can understand that if the legacy holder has not filed any paperwork 
with the NCC, then there is little one could do t penalized the offender.

That is where I think Jordi's comment about the direct peer also comes 
in.  Just as today when confronted with a BGP hijack and no response 
from the hijacking ASN, one approaches the direct upstream, so too the 
policy will have to set a policy on how to deal with the direct upstream 
that enables the hijack, whether it be from a legacy or a regular holder.

Regards,

Hank



>
> Piotr
>