We are doing exactly that: exchanging routing information with one of our
customers using BGP routing over a private network (multiple, redundant VPN
circuits using different ISPs at our end and two different geographically
dispersed sites at our customer's end.) We are using one of the private ASNs,
which works fine for our purposes, but if multiple customers wanted to do the
same thing, we might need to avoid colliding the private ASNs to prevent
route-through to our customers' other vendors or from one customer to another.
Only one customer has dynamic networking, with multiple possible routes; all our
other customers are configured with static routing.
So right now we don't need an assigned ASN, but we might someday.
There is no "Upstream" involved. the networks are peer-to-peer. I think this is
(or would be if there were more peers) an example of what Andrew is describing.
I think Owen is saying the two items (first and third of the reasons to justify
a public ASN) are equivalent and the third is fewer words and easier to
understand. The 1st reason doesn't apply if there is no Upstream, so they
aren't equivalent. However, I'm not sure the first reason is a proper subset of
the third. (If it were, then the first reason would be redundant.)
Don't know if I'm clarifying the question or muddying the waters.
-- John
On 3/22/2022 2:15 PM, Andrew Dul wrote:
"To use an AS Number to interconnect with other Autonomous Systems." was
intended to apply to situations where a public ASN number was desired for
exchanging routes between organizations but where the concept of an "upstream
provider" wasn't appropriate. An example might be if an there were two or more
organizations which are exchanging routes, but the organizations wanted unique
AS Numbers to ensure there are not any AS number collisions.
Hope this helps,
Andrew
On 3/22/2022 10:46 AM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-PPML wrote:
Can someone clarify for me the meaningful difference between:
To originate announcement of IP Number Resources via an accepted protocol
(such as Border Gateway Protocol) from an AS Number different than that of its
upstream provider;
and
To use an AS Number to interconnect with other Autonomous Systems.
—
It seems to me that anything defined by the first sentence would be
encompassed in the second.
Further, while I admit my imagination may be limited here, I am unable to
imagine a useful implementation of the second sentence that would not also
conform to the first and would require a unique non-private ASN.
While I can see useful instances for receive-only (non-originating) BGP
sessions, such as route servers, etc., I’m hard pressed to see why they would
need a unique public ASN. Even if they do, a useful route server is, by
definition, multi-homed.
Not necessarily opposed to the policy as written, but think that it’s a lot of
extra words with little actual value in terms of clarity and perhaps even
muddying the waters a bit.
Owen
On Mar 22, 2022, at 09:04, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote:
On 17 March 2022, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) advanced the following Draft
Policy to Recommended Draft Policy status:
* ARIN-2021-3: Private AS Number and Unique Routing Policy Clarifications
The text of the Recommended Draft Policy is below, and may also be found at:
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2021_3/
You are encouraged to discuss all Recommended Draft Policies on PPML prior to
their presentation at the next ARIN Public Policy Consultation (PPC). PPML
and PPC discussions are invaluable to the AC when determining community
consensus.
The PDP can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/
Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
Regards,
Sean Hopkins
Senior Policy Analyst
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2021-3: Private AS Number and Unique Routing
Policy Clarifications
AC Assessment of Conformance with thePrinciples of Internet Number Resource
Policy
<http://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/#4-principles-of-internet-number-resource-policy>:
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2021-3 conforms to the principles of the ARIN
Policy Development Process as follows:
- By providing greater clarity concerning when a requesting organization
qualifies for AS Numbers, it promotes fair and impartial number resource
administration;
- It is technically sounds because it clarifies the technical requirements
for obtaining AS Numbers (i.e., the need to interconnect with other
organizations’ Autonomous Systems, what constitutes a “unique routing
policy”, and the need to have a network plan); and
- Community support has been demonstrated throughout the process associated
with its development.
Problem Statement:
At ARIN 47, staff identified three points of potential confusion with current
text in NRPM Section 5: AS Numbers.
“Sites that do not require a unique AS Number should use one or more of the
AS Numbers reserved for private use.” Some customers are not aware that their
need for unique AS Numbers depends upon their need (or lack thereof) to
interconnect with other organizations’ Autonomous Systems.
“In order to be assigned an AS Number, each requesting organization must
provide ARIN with verification that it has one of the following…A unique
routing policy (its policy differs from its border gateway peers)…A
multihomed site.” Few customers qualify for AS Numbers under the “unique
routing policy” requirement, because they don’t understand what “unique
routing policy” actually means in practice.
“AS Numbers are issued based on current need. An organization should request
an AS Number only when it is already multihomed or will immediately become
multihomed.” All ARIN delegations are based on current needs, and some
customers aren’t aware they need network plans when they request AS Numbers.
Additionally, clarification that some organizations may have a unique need
for an AS Number outside of utilizing a unique routing policy, such as one
implemented using, for example, a protocol such as Border Gateway Protocol (BGP).
Policy statement:
In Section 5 -
Replace
“Sites that do not require a unique AS Number should use one or more of the
AS Numbers reserved for private use.”
with
“If a unique AS Number is not required for a given network design, one or
more of the AS Numbers reserved for private use should be utilized.”
Replace
“In order to be assigned an AS Number, each requesting organization must
provide ARIN with verification that it has one of the following
A unique routing policy (its policy differs from its border gateway peers) 2.
A multihomed site”
with
“In order to be assigned an AS Number, each requesting organization must
provide ARIN with verification that it requires a unique routing policy, such
as a plan:
To originate announcement of IP Number Resources via an accepted protocol
(such as Border Gateway Protocol) from an AS Number different than that of
its upstream provider;
To multihome a site with one or more Autonomous Systems; or
To use an AS Number to interconnect with other Autonomous Systems.”
Replace
“AS Numbers are issued based on current need. An organization should request
an AS Number only when it is already multihomed or will immediately become
multihomed.”
with
“AS Numbers are issued based on current need, as set out in this section 5.”
Timetable for implementation: Immediate
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please [email protected] you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
--
John Santos
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
781-861-0670 ext 539
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
