Hi all,
I discussed with some folks from Japan who are here at APRICOT and would like to share a couple of observations: * ASN assignments to those with portable assignments - Support from a number of people on ASN assignments to those with portable assignments is noted. - Howver, it is felt that it's better to set the criteria which is specific to ASN, not to make it dependent with portable assignment. - You don't know whether future changes in criteria for portable assighments will make sense as criteria for ASN assignments. * Case of Pakistan It was helpful to hear about the case of Pakistan from Aftab, if I understood it correctly, wishes to be able to switch upstreams easily to ensure adequate service will be provided. It was felt that those needs should be tolerated and find ways to address it, questions were raised whether we should change the general criteria to address an indivisual case like this. The feedback so far is let's think of ways to address those specific indivisual cases with issues, but if the current criteria works for most other people, we shouldn't adjust the default criteria for specific indivisual cases. This should be addressed seperately. * Questions raised on its implication Looking at this from the situation in Japan, it may lead to a situation where some large ISPs may start applying more ASNs for the ease of its operation, for exapmple, applying for over 10 ASNs, or local CATV providers connected under group company's ASN may start applying even though they are able to operate today without global ASNs. We may not need to worry about 4bite ASN pool but may have implications on routing, especially if path validation gets more deployed in the future. * A suggestion An idea has been suggested to keep the multihoming criteria but not make it a must to be multihomed if an applicant can provide justification for the need for an ASN. There should still be a minimum criteria such as an applicant has BGP connection with its upstream, to need an ASN. To give rough guidance to APNIC and NIR hostmasters, give specific example of needs which has already being identified in the guidelines document. e.g. It is expected that an applicant's environment of connectivity leads to the needs to constantly change upstreams with reasons explained We have defined IPv6 distribution policy in a similar manner, withough changing the criteria which applies to most people. Specific cases are described in the guidelines. What are the thoughts from the propers and others about this suggestion? Izumi * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
