On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:25 PM, Michael Sinatra <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 12/04/2014 07:59, John Curran wrote: >> ... >> Actually, the terms regarding indemnification and warrant disclaimer are >> nearly >> identical to that contained in the other RIR's RPKI agreements; are those >> also >> problematic, or is the difficultly that principally that ARIN agreeing to >> the >> terms explicit rather than implicit? > > I disagree. The only terms I was able to find were APNIC's and they > only referred to "Certificates issued by APNIC," not a TAL. So I really > don't think there is another TAL RPA out there that's anything like ARIN's.
Michael - APNIC "CA Terms and Conditions" states "The recipient of any digital certificates issued by the APNIC CA service will indemnify APNIC against any and all claims by third parties for damages of any kind arising from the use of that certificate." Relying parties (even if not subscribers to the CA) are any entities that act in reliance on certificates in the CA, so the terms and conditions would be applicable. How they go about obtaining the TAL doesn't change the indemnification asserted by APNIC. FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
