I’m not opposed to qualifying some cases where private AS may also work, because in those cases, frankly, I think most organizations will either use a private AS rather than go to the trouble of applying, or, they may have a good reason (future plans, etc.) for wanting to get a public AS and not have to re-run all their peering sessions later.OwenOn Feb 26, 2015, at 13:40 , Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at gmail dot com> wrote:Owen,I don't want to discuss too much details since I'm acting chair,but I'm afraid that "unique routing policy" is vague and it may qualify some usecases that private AS may also work.So, what is the definition or understanding for "unique routing policy" in ARIN?
Masato YamanishiYes, I was well aware of that. Is there anything you believe to be incorrect in my comments as a result? Otherwise, I’m not sure what you are getting at.I believe a unique routing policy or multiple peers is sufficient justification.Absent that, I believe that an entity which qualifies for PI and intends to multihome later should legitimately be able to obtain an ASN to simplify their build-out in anticipation of later multihoming.This last part, is, IMHO, the only change that should be contemplated vs. the current existing policy.OwenOn Feb 26, 2015, at 9:45 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at gmail dot com> wrote:Owen and Usman,In following comments, did you consider we are discussing "public" AS numbers?Since we are discussing "public" AS, we should have some kind of justifications why it should be globally unique.Regards,Masato2015-02-25 18:39 GMT-06:00 Owen DeLong <owen at delong dot com>:Usman, since an AS is defined as “A collection of prefixes with a common routing policy”, what would you use one for if not to connect to other autonomous systems? If you are connecting to a single other autonomous system, then, arguably it is impossible for your prefixes to have a distinct routing policy and you are, therefore, part of that other AS. If you are connecting to multiple other autonomous systems, then, you are, by definition multihomed.If you have some better way to manage this, I’m all ears.OwenOn Feb 25, 2015, at 16:26 , Usman Latif <osmankh at yahoo dot com> wrote:* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *ASN is an identifier for an autonomous system - so theoretically speaking, an ASN should have no dependency on multihoming or single homingHowever, what we need is a better way to regulate assignment of ASNs so their allocation doesn't become wasteful..Regards,UsmanHi Secretariat,I would like to understand the policy/secretariats view on the justification/requirements of subsequent ASN resource requests.
...SkeeveSkeeve Stevens - Senior IP Brokerv4Now - an eintellego Networks serviceskeeve at v4now dot com ; www.v4now.comPhone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeveIP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy