Thank you for highlighting that point, Ricardo. And I agree with your assessment, especially the point that the scope of the current text under discussion does not qualify the proposal to be a global policy proposal as defined.

And as a data point, there was also discussion at the ARIN 44 meeting last week on this topic.

Louie

On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 6:52 PM Ricardo Patara <patara@registro.br> wrote:
Hi Herve, hope it is all fine.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
I've been following that discussion and is very interesting.

Regarding the comments to make this a global policy I have some doubts.

According to the ASO MoU we have the following as definition of global
proposal:

"Global policies are defined within the scope of this agreement as
Internet number resource policies that have the agreement of all RIRs
according to their policy development processes and ICANN, and require
specific actions or outcomes on the part of IANA or any other external
ICANN-related body in order to be implemented."

if the idea is to instruct IANA to generate ROAs for unallocated
resources under its administration, that would apply.

But if the question is to RIRs generate those ROAs, then I don't think a
global proposal would fit, as there would be no instruction to IANA.

I guess, and correct me if I am wrong, the last scenario could be seen
as global *coordinated* proposal if similar text is presented in all RIR
but in this case there would be no need to have them with the exact same
text and neither all RIRs with it.

Regards,
Ricardo


Em 02/11/2019 15:15, herve.clement@orange.com escreveu:
> Dear all,
>
>  
>
> Just for your information, there is a new proposal within the RIPE
> region called "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address
> Space" aiming to instruct the RIPE NCC to create ROAs with origin AS0
> for all unallocated and unassigned address space under its control:
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-08.
>
>  
>
> In the “Arguments opposing the proposal” §, the authors note that “A
> global policy would be preferred, which covers all address space
> considered unallocated, unassigned, and for special use managed by IANA,
> and which requests that all the Regional Registries perform the same
> actions for address space which they manage directly”
>
>  
>
> This proposal is on the beginning of the development process (discussion
> phase).
>
> I will keep you informed if there are specific news on it.
>
>  
>
> Best regards
>
>  
>
> Hervé
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AC-DISCUSS mailing list - Workspace for ASO AC operations. Posting is restricted, archive is publicly available.
> AC-DISCUSS@aso.icann.org
> https://aso.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ac-discuss
>

--
Ricardo Patara

_______________________________________________
AC-DISCUSS mailing list - Workspace for ASO AC operations. Posting is restricted, archive is publicly available.
AC-DISCUSS@aso.icann.org
https://aso.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ac-discuss