Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] New Policy Proposal Received - "Multihoming not required for ASN (AFPUB-2019-ASN-DRAFT01)"

Sander Steffann sander at
Sat Mar 30 11:41:48 UTC 2019


> Since we’re no longer limited to 16 bit ASNs, personally, I think that the requirement beyond the annual fees to maintaining an ASN is an anachronism and we should simply state that ASNs are available to anyone who meets one of the two following requirements:
> 	1.	A unique routing policy
> or	2.	Interconnection with other ASNs involving an exterior gateway protocol which requires a unique ASN.
> I believe that covers pretty much every circumstance in which an ASN would be useful and gives tremendous leeway in obtaining ASNs where needed.
> Is there any reason we can’t make the policy that simple?

I am a big fan of making it this simple.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list