Re: [sig-policy] APNIC EC endorses policy proposals from APNIC 52

To: "Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi" <sunny@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] APNIC EC endorses policy proposals from APNIC 52
From: Aftab Siddiqui <aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 23:31:50 +1100
Cc: sig-policy <sig-policy@apnic.net>
Delivered-to: sig-policy@clove.apnic.net
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=yo3/BlialnxTHuPPSyY9DOjWCQjWSX4bQTaxi752gsU=; b=AkE+PfzVJVHl1CV4tudpJbz0tcLRYzecxjwzdnN2WaLAdIS+hMPyU8fNxcyO5GdD3g cTxQRi30V1Rwfp+4ymM2XtLoIDNpzieKhivpjuN28UfDmjXjZSSFgFrykyxDRzuIUvCS t+YrtI2QRctJMt9+eNoi0SDK0JhxjMCQgKZBs/X2LzcS4Z7chJRzl6XPIzzxcnsQVgNG U6ZQnSTDJ0l2Z/g1x231elEqUThWYh/0iaebVBOhQerXATmSgEZnhuVGdscPYijW9c0V nuxTAH4ICXUpeJEuugCZ3izKZ2Sl/ZBLkRcj9z+AKbudn0rFtLymzDTDIJyRrm+mJbPN wtGQ==
In-reply-to: <1b4b5f49-5e87-9ca4-d664-01d4ff232725@apnic.net>
List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <1b4b5f49-5e87-9ca4-d664-01d4ff232725@apnic.net>

Hi Sunny,

prop-138: Restricting AS-ID in ROA, that reached consensus at APNIC 52
to be a guideline will also be implemented along with these four
proposals.

As per this link here [1], APNIC secretariat updated the guidelines on 6th December. The text mentioned there does not comply with what is suggested in the prop-138. I can still create ROAs and route/route6 objects using the ROA interface.

[1] - https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-138/