As the coauthors of the 2019 NSF-supported report that contributed to the 
current momentum toward overcoming the barriers RPKI adoption, a prior posting 
asked for our assessment of the changes.  Our apologies that we won't be able 
to join you at this NANOG.  We hope to put together some type of program in 
Atlanta in February.

We would say that intent of ARIN's Sept. 26 and 29 updates 
((link<https://www.arin.net/announcements/2022/documents/rpa_092622_redline.pdf>
 and 
link<https://www.arin.net/announcements/2022/documents/rpa_092922_redline.pdf>) 
to the RPA-to permit distribution of the TAL without signing the RPA-represent 
positive steps to address the most significant concern that we raised.  In 
particular, the language in Section 5 added by the Sept. 29 update explicitly 
stating, "Notwithstanding the foregoing, You are specifically allowed to 
publicly distribute the ARIN TAL, including by embedding the ARIN TAL in 
relying party software," appears to authorize including ARIN's TAL in all 
distributions of validator software, and RPKI adopters would no longer need to 
download ARIN's TAL from its website.  If effective, this is would remove the 
single most important legal obstacle to broader use of RPKI.

The continuing wrinkle is that Section 5 authorizes distribution of ORCP 
services (including the ARIN TAL) only as permitted by the ORCP service terms.  
Section 9 requires third parties receiving this information either to have 
agreed to the RPA or to have entered into an agreement with the distributing 
party that includes the key terms of the RPA.  That would suggest that anyone 
distributing validator software with ARIN's TAL must ensure that the recipient 
has agreed to the RPA in order to avoid violating the ORCP service terms.  
Although open source typically relies on licenses that are good against all 
users regardless of knowledge or assent (because they sound in property instead 
of contract), assent to the terms of the RPA could be incorporated into the 
distribution process, perhaps in the same manner used for other certificate 
authorities, which typically have terms of use.

Another comment on this thread asked if ARIN has now addressed the other issues 
raised by our report.  It is our assessment that ARIN has adequately addressed 
three of our other concerns, has announced its intention to address two others, 
and partially addressed one.

The three issues that ARIN has adequately addressed include:


  *   Dropping provision of the RSA requiring legacy address holders to 
acknowledge ARIN's property rights in IP addresses:  dropped in update to LRSA 
dated Sept. 12, 2022 
(link<https://www.arin.net/about/corporate/agreements/rsav13_changes.pdf>).
  *   Drop provision of RPA prohibiting sharing of RPKI-derived data in a 
machine-readable format:  authorized for informational purposes by update to 
RPA dated Oct. 21, 2019 
(link<https://www.arin.net/vault/announcements/2019/20191021.html>); authorized 
for routing purposes by update to RPA dated Sept. 26, 2022 
(link<https://www.arin.net/announcements/2022/documents/rpa_092622_redline.pdf>).
  *   Better dissemination of best practices to the community:  addressed by 
expansion of RPKI training at FISPA, WISPA, CaribNOG, and NANOG.



ARIN has its intention to address two of our other concerns in the near future:



  *   Better disclosure to government agencies of ARIN's willingness to waive 
insemination and choice of law clauses when barred by law:  likely to be 
addressed by ARIN's announced plans to create webpage specifically for 
governments.
  *   Better disclosure of operational practices, such as uptime, update 
frequency, and response expectations:  likely to be addressed further by 
planned update to certificate practices statement.



It partially addressed one concern that we raised.



  *   Dropping blanket indemnification clause in favor of disclaimer of 
warranties and liability:  revised RPA to exclude indemnification for ARIN's 
gross negligence by update to RPA dated Oct. 21, 2019 
(link<https://www.arin.net/vault/announcements/2019/20191021.html>).

We hope these comments are helpful and look forward to continuing to work with 
the community on removing the remaining legal barriers to RPKI adoption.

Christopher Yoo (on behalf of myself and David Wishnick)

Reply via email to