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)"

Frank Habicht geier at
Sun Mar 31 06:36:49 UTC 2019


On 30/03/2019 01:11, Owen DeLong wrote:
> 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.

I agree, this is the right direction to take; more permissive.


> Is there any reason we can’t make the policy that simple?

Can't see any.

> Owen

More information about the RPD mailing list