Could I ask that the APNIC hostmasters to comment on the following:

Have you ever been made aware of a situation where due of the current
wording of the relevant clauses in the policy, a member or potential member
has not made a resource application where they would otherwise have been
able to?

In other words has the current policy in the eyes of the host masters ever
been a barrier to entry?




On Wednesday, 4 February 2015, Masato Yamanishi <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear SIG members
>
> The proposal "prop-114: Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria"
> has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>
> It  will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 39 in Fukuoka,
> Japan on Thursday, 5 March 2015.
>
> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
> before the meeting.
>
> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
> express your views on the proposal:
>
>      - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
>      - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
>   tell the community about your situation.
>      - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
>      - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>      - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
>   effective?
>
>
> Information about this proposal is available at:
>
>     http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-114
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Masato
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> prop-114-v001: Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Proposer:     Aftab Siddiqui
>               [email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
>
>               Skeeve Stevens
>               [email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
>
>
> 1. Problem statement
> --------------------
>
>     The current ASN assignment policy dictates two eligibility criteria
>     and both should be fulfilled in order to get an ASN. The policy
>     seems to imply that both requirements i.e. multi-homing and clearly
>     defined single routing policy must be met simultaneously, this has
>     created much confusion in interpreting the policy.
>
>     As a result organizations have either provided incorrect information
>     to get the ASN or barred themselves from applying.
>
>
> 2. Objective of policy change
> -----------------------------
>
>     In order to make the policy guidelines simpler we are proposing to
>     modify the text describing the eligibility criteria for ASN
>     assignment by removing multi-homing requirement for the organization.
>
>
> 3. Situation in other regions
> -----------------------------
>
> ARIN:
>     It is not mandatory but optional to be multi-homed in order get ASN
>
> RIPE:
>     Policy to remove multi-homing requirement is currently in discussion
>     and the current phase ends 12 February 2015
>         Policy - https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-03
>
> LACNIC:
>     only inter-connect is mandatory not multi-homing
>
> AFRINIC:
>      It is mandatory to be multi-homed in order to get ASN.
>
>
> 4. Proposed policy solution
> ---------------------------
>
>     An organization is eligible for an ASN assignment if it:
>      - Is planning to use it within next 6 months
>
>
> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> -----------------------------
>
> Advantages:
>
>     Removing the mandatory multi-homing requirement from the policy will
>     make sure that organizations are not tempted to provide wrong
>     information in order to fulfil the criteria of eligibility.
>
> Disadvantages:
>
>     No disadvantage.
>
>
> 6. Impact on resource holders
> -----------------------------
>
>     No impact on existing resource holders.
>
>
> 7. References
> -------------
>
>

-- 
--
Dean Pemberton

Technical Policy Advisor
InternetNZ
+64 21 920 363 (mob)
[email protected]

To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential.
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to