[routing-wg] 2019-08 New Policy Proposal (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space)

Your guess is correct. We have been inspired by the APNIC proposal.
And yes agreed that a global policy would be best but as work already
started we’ve decided to just file it with RIPE for now to at least get it
started. Once other RIRs adopt this kind of work it can be turned into a
global policy. Also we didn’t want to wait that long; a global policy can
take very long.

Also replying to some of the other comments in the thread;

- amount of work: “it’ll take RIPE a lot of time or efforts to implement
this”. I would want to wait with conclusions when RIPE (probably Nathalie)
is done with the impact assessment. Only then we can take conclusions.

- the impact of this proposal is limited: perhaps it is but should that
withhold us from doin it? Speed limits and wearing seatbelts aren’t
preventing every casualty in car accident as well but still we enforce
those. Why not at least try to prevent potential hijacking?

On Friday, November 1, 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via routing-wg <
routing-wg at ripe.net> wrote:

> I’m guessing, in fact, that this proposal has been inspired from the APNIC
> proposal, which now is already a policy. It will be interesting to
> understand if the authors were aware of that, or if they reached the same
> conclusion, or there are different motivations, etc.
>
>
>
> Of course, I supported the APNIC proposal, and support it here.
>
>
>
> I will like to add that, even if I agree that the best path is probably a
> global policy, and possibly also an IETF document to back it, both of
> those, will require time. Meanwhile, I think is better to move on already
> in as many RIRs as we can, and then, if all the 5 RIRs adopt it, then we
> may want to try to have a common text and “convert” the policies into a
> global one.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jordi
>
> @jordipalet
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> El 1/11/19 13:14, "routing-wg en nombre de Aftab Siddiqui" <
> routing-wg-bounces at ripe.net en nombre de aftab.siddiqui at gmail.com>
> escribió:
>
>
>
>
> Hi Clement,
>
>
>
>
> I feel that the idea is good. But...
>
> It's true that there is not that much IPv4 "unallocated" remaining
> space yet, and therefore that it mostly concerns IPv6 space.
> However, if that policy is accepted and implemented, I'd say that it
> should be globally done with cooperation among other RIRs and even with
> space not delegated yet to any RIRs.
>
>
>
> Just to let you know that similar policy has already been approved by
> APNIC community in the September meeting and awaiting APNIC EC (Board)
> approval this month and will be implemented max by January 2020.
>
>
>
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-132
>
>
>
>
> So, maybe it's quite early to go on it ?
>
>
>
> One RIR is already doing it, so I guess its not quite early for RIPE :)
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Aftab A. Siddiqui
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Clément Cavadore
>
>
> **********************************************
> 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.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/routing-wg/attachments/20191103/d0c060bb/attachment.html>