Hi,

Just to mention that Izumi mentioned what is also largely requested and
done at the AfriNIC region as well. I don't think there is any policy
implication for member that peers with a different ASN other than the ones
provided during application.

Cheers!
sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 27 Feb 2015 06:14, "Izumi Okutani" <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2015/02/27 14:00, Aftab Siddiqui wrote:
> > Hi Guangliang,
> >
> >
> >> The option "b" is acceptable.
> >>
> >> b. If an applicant can demonstrate a plan to be multihomed in
> >>       immediate future, it is not a must they are physically multihomed
> >>       at the time of submitting a request
> >>
> >
> > But even then applicant has to provide the details of those ASN with whom
> > they may or may not multhome in future. right?
> >
>
> 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 plan and this
> seems to be working OK.
>
>
> Regards,
> Izumi
>
> *              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

Reply via email to