Nope - you almost had me, but now you've lost me again, well done. What you are suggesting *IS* regardless of need, and thats what I think people are missing. If you are not required to demonstrate need to get something, then it is allocated regardless of need. I realise this might seem semantic, but policy is all about semantics.
This 'anticipation of future need' stuff is at best ethereal and at worst a fallacy. Lets not forget that there is an almost zero barrier to entry with regard to ASN allocation should the member require one. I just don't subscribe to this "I may one day require one so give it to me now" It's the same as saying "I don't require an IPv6 allocation today, but I anticipate that at some point I'll need a /10. Just give it all to me now so that I don't have to make difficult design decisions later." If everyone gets one then I can live with that. What I can't live with is opening up a can of worms with a "I might one day need something so please allocate it now". It's a dangerous slippery slope. Today ASNs, Tomorrow IPv4, next day IPv6. -- 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 Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 8:03 AM, David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2/27/15 16:05 , Dean Pemberton wrote: >> >> So a "maybe someday" ASN? >> >> So anyone who has PI space and doesn't already have an ASN gets >> allocated one regardless of need. >> Any new member who gets PI space gets an ASN allocated as a matter of >> course. > > > Don't allocated one if they don't want one. But if they want one, and they > already have PI, or getting new PI, then why say no? And its not regardless > of need, more accurately in anticipation of future need. > > If someone gets an ASN, and uses it, when they get PI, they will have a much > easier time porting to a new provider, or better yet, becoming multi-homed > and/or participating in an IX in the future. > > So, don't force them to get an ASN, just don't force then wait until they > multi-home their PI either. > >> Any additional ASN requested by a member must conform to existing policy. > > > The exact wording of the current policy may or may not be right for the > situation, but that is the basic idea. Also, you should still be able to > get an ASN to do PA multi-homing, if you are multi-homing with a cut-out > from an upstream provider. > >> Is this where we're at? Change the proposal and see where we get to. > > > Yes, please. > >> Why not make it your APNIC membership number and be done with it :). >> That lowers the barrier even further and means that people wouldn't need >> assistance applying for them. > > > That's silly, your APNIC Member number should just be your credit card > number. :) > > > -- > ================================================ > David Farmer Email: [email protected] > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 > ================================================ * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
