[rpd] Fwd: [sig-policy] [New Policy Proposal] prop-114: Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria

[Noah Maina]

I would support such a proposal.

1. There are situations where an organisation requires an ASN so that they
can at most singlehome to one provider due to budget constraints in terms
of the no. of upstream carriers they can connect too.  This is very very
common today.

2. Some upstream providers have diverse paths or redundancies and as such
an organisation could opt to go for such a provider knowing that there
transit service would be guaranteed as long as they have a stable
interconnect to such an upstream provider.

3. An organisation would chose to multihome to a single upstream but to
different sites of the same upstream...how about that..!!!

4. One could justify the 2 upstream providers requirement to Afrinic for
instance...but a few months down the finance year, they decided to
terminate a contract with one upstream and stick with the other....Afrinic
won't come calling as its not their business anywhere....thus it makes no
sense emphasising 2 upstream providers as a criteria for getting an ASN
because of the dynamics of business today.....

My 2 cents....

Noah
On 8 Feb 2015 06:39, "Ernest" <ernest at afrinic.net> wrote:

> FYI - this could be of interest in our region.
>
> The proposal removes the need to multi-home as the only criteria to
> receive an ASN, replaces it with:
>
> " An organization is eligible for an ASN assignment if is planning
> to use it within next 6 months "
>
> More below.
>
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > prop-114-v001: Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Proposer:     Aftab Siddiqui
> >               aftab.siddiqui at gmail.com
> >
> >               Skeeve Stevens
> >               skeeve at eintellegonetworks.com
> >
> >
> > 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
> > -------------
> >
> > * sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> > _______________________________________________
> > sig-policy mailing list
> > sig-policy at lists.apnic.net
> > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20150208/1fe6563d/attachment.html>