erik,

Personally, I'm not in favour of this policy as I don't like the NCC to start to injecting ROA's that are not allocated or assigned to members or end-users.

I think it sets the wrong precedence for the community and it could open up for scope creep to abuse the system for other usage. So on that regards, I wouldn't mind if the proposal would be dropped.

first, as $subject says, if anywhere, this should be in the routing wg. let us resist the inclination to make what was the anti spam wg the net police, judge, and jury. on the proposal itself, i am of two minds. while i see negligible initial harm, it's not clear it will do a lot of good. and i see your point about the slippery slope of mission creep. i do find it amusing that it uses the singular case where an ROV origin can not be 'usefully' forged. i.e. the attacker can not postpend AS 0 and have it accepted. but this cute factor still does not sell the proposal to me. randy

Erik, Randy mentioned this, but to be very explicit, this policy is not being discussed in the AA-WG. It was X-posted here to make the members of this WG aware of a policy being proposed in Routing, so the discussion etc. is taking place there. Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 ________________________________________ From: Erik Bais <erik@bais.name> Sent: Monday 23 December 2019 08:55 To: Petrit Hasani; Brian Nisbet Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-08 New Policy Proposal (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space) to be discussed on Routing Working Group Mailing List Hi Petrit & Brian, Could you provide some insight on the status of this proposal ? I've seen not much (if at all...) discussion on the topic on the ML. I've seen that the discussion phase is already passed and we are more than a month further . . . and even for the AA-WG ML, with no replies, that is probably one of the first ... Personally, I'm not in favour of this policy as I don't like the NCC to start to injecting ROA's that are not allocated or assigned to members or end-users. I think it sets the wrong precedence for the community and it could open up for scope creep to abuse the system for other usage. So on that regards, I wouldn't mind if the proposal would be dropped. Regards, Erik Bais On 31/10/2019, 15:40, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Petrit Hasani" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net on behalf of phasani@ripe.net> wrote: Dear colleagues, A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2019-08, "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space", is now available for discussion in the Routing Working Group This proposal aims to instructs the RIPE NCC to create ROAs with origin AS0 for all unallocated and unassigned address space under its control. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-08 This proposed policy may be of interest to the Anti-Abuse working group as well. Therefore, we encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <routing-wg@ripe.net> before 29 November 2019. Kind regards, -- Petrit Hasani Policy Officer RIPE NCC