Re: [sig-policy] [New Policy Proposal] prop-114: Modification in the ASN
I discussed with some folks from Japan who are here at APRICOT and would
like to share a couple of observations:
* ASN assignments to those with portable assignments
- Support from a number of people on ASN assignments to those
with portable assignments is noted.
- Howver, it is felt that it's better to set the criteria which is
specific to ASN, not to make it dependent with portable assignment.
- You don't know whether future changes in criteria for portable
assighments will make sense as criteria for ASN assignments.
* Case of Pakistan
It was helpful to hear about the case of Pakistan from Aftab, if I
understood it correctly, wishes to be able to switch upstreams easily to
ensure adequate service will be provided. It was felt that those needs
should be tolerated and find ways to address it, questions were raised
whether we should change the general criteria to address an indivisual
case like this.
The feedback so far is let's think of ways to address those specific
indivisual cases with issues, but if the current criteria works for most
other people, we shouldn't adjust the default criteria for specific
indivisual cases. This should be addressed seperately.
* Questions raised on its implication
Looking at this from the situation in Japan, it may lead to a situation
where some large ISPs may start applying more ASNs for the ease of its
operation, for exapmple, applying for over 10 ASNs, or local CATV
providers connected under group company's ASN may start applying even
though they are able to operate today without global ASNs.
We may not need to worry about 4bite ASN pool but may have implications
on routing, especially if path validation gets more deployed in the future.
* A suggestion
An idea has been suggested to keep the multihoming criteria but not make
it a must to be multihomed if an applicant can provide justification for
the need for an ASN. There should still be a minimum criteria such as an
applicant has BGP connection with its upstream, to need an ASN. To give
rough guidance to APNIC and NIR hostmasters, give specific example of
needs which has already being identified in the guidelines document.
e.g.
It is expected that an applicant's environment of connectivity leads
to the needs to constantly change upstreams with reasons explained
We have defined IPv6 distribution policy in a similar manner, withough
changing the criteria which applies to most people. Specific cases are
described in the guidelines.
What are the thoughts from the propers and others about this suggestion?
Izumi