On 27/Feb/15 07:34, Izumi Okutani wrote:
We would know which organization the ASNs are assigned to, as those
upstream ASNs are already used.
We don't have a formal mechanism to check the authenticity of the POCs
but usually check the e-mails provided are reachable. We would find it
Here's a quote from an even OLDER RFC which hasn't stood the test of time.
- Large organizations like banks and retail chains are
switching to TCP/IP for their internal communication. Large
numbers of local workstations like cash registers, money
Hi Izumi,
Thanks. Helpful to know and that's consistent with how we handle ASN
requests in JPNIC.
w.r.t JPNIC, do they ask for the details of those ASN (along with contact
details) with whom applicant is planning to multi-home in future? Do they
have any mechanism to check the authenticity
Hi Aftab,
On 2015/02/27 14:19, Aftab Siddiqui wrote:
Hi Izumi,
Thanks. Helpful to know and that's consistent with how we handle ASN
requests in JPNIC.
w.r.t JPNIC, do they ask for the details of those ASN (along with contact
details) with whom applicant is planning to multi-home in
I'm sure Skeeve also thinks that organisations should be able to get all
the IP addresses they might ever need all on day one.
I'm sure he even knows a company who could arrange that for them.
Lets see where the community thinks this should go.
It still sounds like unlimited ASNs for anyone who
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Izumi Okutani iz...@nic.ad.jp wrote:
May I clarify with APNIC hosmaster whether :
a. It is a must for an applicant to be multihomed at the time of
submitting the request
b. If an applicant can demonstrate a plan to be multihomed in
immediate
On 27/Feb/15 07:14, Izumi Okutani wrote:
I don't know whether it's adequate to do the same case in the APNIC
region but sharing our case as a reference -
JPNIC requests for contact information for those ASNs they plan to be
connected.
We sometimes we contact the upstreams and confirm the
Personally, I also faced the same complexity about the mandatory
multi-homing requirement when i tried to apply for ASN of new ISP.
I support this by considering organizations are not tempted to provide
wrong information . Make simple and authenticate information .
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at
Yes we did... Like when Cisco started rolling out 1.1.1.1 to Wireless
Controllers and other things.
...Skeeve
On Friday, February 27, 2015, Dean Pemberton d...@internetnz.net.nz wrote:
Here's a quote from an even OLDER RFC which hasn't stood the test of time.
- Large organizations
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 03:08:42PM +, Gaurab Raj Upadhaya wrote:
On 2/25/15 11:10 PM, David Farmer wrote:
A network of 1 or 2 routers probably doesn't justify an ASN unless
it is multi-homed or connected to an IX. A network of 100 routers
probably justifies an ASN regardless. Then
In theory, this is why each RIR has a public policy process open to any who
choose to participate.
The fact that operator participation in the process is limited (voluntarily by
the operators themselves) continues to cause problems for operators. This not
only affects RIRs, but also the IETF,
Yes, 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
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
We will have new wording soon.
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
*v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
ske...@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau
linkedin.com/in/skeeve
Understood your point. Thx.
Regards,
Masato Yamanishi
2015-02-26 18:19 GMT-06:00 Owen DeLong o...@delong.com:
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
15 matches
Mail list logo
