All, I¹m having an offline discussion with Aftab, basically the issue he¹s trying to address is that new ISPs in small countries/cities may not meet the day 1 requirements for an ASN, but however should be eligible since they will require an ASN to peer/multihome at some point in the future (which I do agree)
Currently they all have to "commit fraud² in order to get an ASN, and I guess some religion takes that more seriously than others. Would we the proposal be acceptable if we reworded the proposal to say something on the lines of ³Eligible LIRs with APNIC Assigned Portable addresses are also eligible for as ASN²? This would cover the use case without opening the floodgates. Thoughts? Raf On 25/2/15 2:33 pm, "Dean Pemberton" <[email protected]> wrote: >Members potentially lying on their resource application forms is not >sufficient justification to remove all the rules entirely. >If someone lies on their a countries visa application about a previous >conviction for example, thats not justification for the entire country >to just give up issuing visas. > >It sounds like you are accusing the hostmasters of doing an inadequate >job of checking policy compliance of member applications for >resources. Perhaps this is something that you'd like to take up with >them directly rather than proposing that we remove all the rules in >the existing policies. > > >Regards, >Dean >-- >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. > > >On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Aftab Siddiqui ><[email protected]> wrote: >> Thanks Guangliang for the update, >> >>> >>> According to the current APNIC ASN policy document, the definition of >>> multihomed is as below. >>> >>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/asn-policy#3.4 >>> >>> 3.4 Multihomed >>> >>> A multi-homed AS is one which is connected to more than one other AS. >>>An >>> AS also qualifies as multihomed if it is connected to a public Internet >>> Exchange Point. >>> >>> In the ASN request form, you will be asked to provide the estimate ASN >>> implementation date, two peer AS numbers and their contact details. It >>>is >>> also acceptable if your network only connect to an IXP. >> >> >> So what if I only have one upstream provider and doesn't have a Public >>IX in >> place? What If I just whois any member from my country and provide AS >> numbers and contact details publicly available? Do you check back after >>3 >> months that the AS you provided to the applicant is actually peering >>with >> the ones they mentioned in the application? Do you send email >>notification >> to those contacts provided in the application that XYZ has mentioned >>your AS >> to be peer with in future? >> >> Regards, >> >> Aftab A. Siddiqui. >* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy > * >_______________________________________________ >sig-policy mailing list >[email protected] >http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
