-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

support.

but i suggest the text could be simplified to be

"have allocated provider independent address space by APNIC, AND intend to multi-home in the future"

the 'previous' term is confusing. kind of implies that it doesn't need to be current allocation (so in theory returned/re-claimed space users could qualify - though that is not the intention).

simplify.

- -gaurab

On 3/6/15 12:15 AM, Masato Yamanishi wrote:

Dear SIG members

A new version of the proposal “prop-114: prop-114: Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.

Information about earlier versions is available from:

http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-114

You are encouraged to express your views on the proposal:

• Do you support or oppose the proposal? - Is there anything in the

proposal that is not clear? - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?

Please find the text of the proposal below.

Kind Regards,

Masato

---

prop-114-v003: Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria

---

Proposer: Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com mailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com

Skeeve Stevens skeeve@eintellegonetworks.com mailto:skeeve@eintellegonetworks.com

1. Problem statement -----------------------------

The current ASN assignment policy states two eligibility criteria and that both criteria should be fulfilled in order to obtain an ASN. The policy seems to imply that both requirements i.e. multi-homing and clearly defined single routing policy must be met simultaneously, this has created much confusion in interpreting the policy.

As a result organizations have either provided incorrect information to get the ASN or barred themselves from applying where they still have a valid justification for obtaining an ASN.

2. Objective of policy change

---

In order to make the policy guidelines simpler we are proposing to modify the text describing the eligibility criteria for ASN assignment by providing alternate criteria to obtaining an ASN.

3. Situation in other regions

---

ARIN: It is not mandatory but optional to be multi-homed in order get ASN

RIPE: Policy to remove multi-homing requirement is currently in discussion and the current phase ends 12 February 2015 (awaiting Chair decision) Policy - https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-03

LACNIC: Only inter-connect is mandatory not multi-homing

AFRINIC: It is mandatory to be multi-homed in order to get ASN.

4. Proposed policy solution ------------------------------------

An organisation is eligible for an ASN assignment if:

• they are currently multi-homed, OR

• have previous allocated provider independent address space by

APNIC, AND intend to multi-home in the future

5. Advantages / Disadvantages

---

Advantages:

By adding the additional criteria of Guidelines managed by APNIC Secretariat, this would enable the Secretariat to make decisions based on common or rare use cases, but that may still be a valid request.

Disadvantages:

It may be perceived that this policy would enable members to obtain ASN’s more easily, and in return cause faster consumption of ASN’s in the region. Given the relative ease of obtaining an ASN with ‘work around’ methods, we do not perceive this will actually have any effect.

6. Impact on resource holders

---

No impact on existing resource holders.

•          sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
  

• _______________________________________________ sig-policy

mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

- --

http://www.gaurab.org.np/