Search RPD Archives
[rpd] New Policy Proposal Received - "Multihoming not required for ASN (AFPUB-2019-ASN-DRAFT01)"
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Sat Apr 6 09:18:26 UTC 2019
El 6/4/19 1:15, "S. Moonesamy" <sm+af at afrinic.net> escribió:
At 03:04 PM 05-04-2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:
>I agree, and you may guess that if I know that it was being
>published today, is because I've asked already to the staff :-)
>I don't keep myself the emails from that discussion (I delete them
>once I respond), and you are deleting that text, so I can to see it
>anymore ... So please, don't delete text from emails, so to have a
I'll try to remember that for your emails.
>I captured it from the mailing list archive. I think you mean this:
>After receiving feedback from Resource Members, I read the
>information on the web site to see what could be useful to
>them. Here's an example: "All requests for ASNs under these criteria
>will be evaluated using the guidelines described in RFC 1930 or its
>successors". That RFC contains ten pages. The English version of
>the text in your email fits in one page. That text contains the
>words "routing policy". Would a network operator understand those words?
>-> Yes, anyone requesting an ASN MUST understand that. Anyone
>reading the policy manual MUST understand that. Otherwise, they
>should ask the staff or get some training!
Thanks for the response.
>There was also the following in the text: "or be planning to
>interconnect within a period of no more than six (6) month as of the
>moment of the application". Is that clearer in comparison with "a
>reasonably short time thereafter"?
>-> I don't see where is that text? Anyway, in my opinion, in some
>cases it is better to not provide strict deadline, so in a case by
>case basis the staff can decide.
There are the following words in the service level commitment :
"provide an effective response on all queries addressed to it, within
two (2) working days". Should that be changed to: provide an
effective response on all queries addressed to it, within a
reasonably short time thereafter?
I think this is a mix of things. AfriNIC is offering a service to the members. AfriNIC is not deploying networks. Deploying and operating networks has a different set/level of complexities.
Despite that, I will be in favor, if the community or even the impact analysis considers this is the right thing to do, to suggest a 12-months time frame. I think this is what we have in other policies.
Now, for that to happen, we need to know it now! So please, community speak up. Otherwise, what is not making sense to me, is to have a simple policy proposal, which is needed, to have only 3-4 people contributing into the discussion, rejected in the meeting for something that is so simple to clarify now.
>-> if you mean that in LACNIC they mention six months, I didn't
>developed that policy
>proposal and didn't realized about that. I may probably actually
>suggest a policy to reword it there as well ...
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
More information about the RPD