> I don't think we can operate under the assumption that 1/3rd of the > ASes in the global Internet routing system are single-homed.
I am referencing information presented by Marco Schmidt (RIPE NCC) at a recent open house on ASNs here: https://ripe89.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/88-Personal-ASN.pdf I agree that a wider perspective might be useful here, as this might indeed be collected from RIPE RIS. > > - Various anycast use-cases are incompatible with that requirement > > Can you elaborate a bit more beyond stating a simple assertion? - Using large hosters as 'Anycast' PoPs (frequently done with, e.g., Vultr) - The setups for a.root and j.root - Any Anycast setup with more than one site, as 1930 states: "Without exception, an AS must have only one routing policy." (This may very well be the root-cause of what is happening with the a.root / j.root ASes) Furthermore, prevalent BYOPIP use-cases also see a lot of single homed ASes. Similarly, I doubt that most ASes still conform to "Without exception, an AS must have only one routing policy." in general. > > - Technically, IXes are not really compatible with RFC1930 atm > > either > > Can you elaborate a bit more beyond stating a simple assertion? An IX is (usually) not originating prefixes. Origination of prefixes is strictly implied in 1930, as "[...] the exchange of external routing information alone does not constitute the need for an AS." With best regards, Tobias -- Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig T +31 616 80 98 99 M [email protected] Pronouns: he/him/his _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
