Dear SIG members
The proposal 'Change to assignment policy for AS numbers' has been
sent
to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy
SIG at
APNIC 26 in Christchurch, New Zealand, 25-29 August 2008.
The proposal's history can be found at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-064-v001.html
We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing
list
before the meeting.
The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
express your views on the proposal:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal?
- Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If
so,
tell the community about your situation.
- Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
- Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
- What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
effective?
randy and jian
________________________________________________________________________
prop-064-v001: Change to assignment policy for AS numbers
________________________________________________________________________
Authors: James Spenceley
james@vocus.com.au
Version: 1
Date: 22 July 2008
1. Introduction
----------------
The policy seeks to create awareness earlier within the community for
the need to support 4-byte AS numbers without mandating an absolute
final adoption of 4-byte AS numbers.
2. Summary of current problem
------------------------------
The current policy has three critical dates with associated policy
changes for the assignment of 4-byte AS numbers as documented in
APNIC-094-v003, "Policies for Autonomous System number management
in the
Asia Pacific region [1]:
1 January 2007 APNIC assigns two-byte AS numbers by default.
APNIC assigns four-byte AS numbers on request.
1 January 2009 APNIC assigns four-byte AS numbers by default.
APNIC assigns two-byte AS numbers on request.
1 January 2010 APNIC ceases to make any distinction between two- and
four-byte AS numbers.
APNIC assigns from an undifferentiated four-byte AS
number pool.
As the policy currently stands today, we have a specific jump from
'must
request a 2-byte AS' to 4-byte AS numbers being generally assigned.
Currently LIRs may if they choose, simply continue to request 2-
byte AS
numbers until 1 January 2010 at which time APNIC will begin
assignment
of 4-byte AS numbers from without differentiation,
This places little requirement on the general provider community to
support 4-byte AS numbers or equipment vendors to implement and
support
4-byte AS numbers.
3. Situation in other RIRs
---------------------------
The other RIRs assign 4-byte ASNs in the same way as APNIC.
If successful, it is expected that this policy will be presented to
the
other RIRs for adoption.
4. Details of the proposal
---------------------------
4.1 This proposal seeks to create an intermediary stage where LIRs
will
be assigned a 4-byte AS number by default unless it is
unsuitable.
An LIR requesting a 2-byte AS number would need to demonstrate
that one (or more) of their peers or transit providers are
unable or unwilling to support a 4-byte AS number.
4.2 An LIR can demonstrate the need for a 2-byte AS number by
submitting supporting documentation such as an email or trouble
ticket stating that that the peer or provider is unable or
unwilling
to accept a 4-byte AS number.
4.3 The intermediary stage is proposed between the two existing
stages:
1 January 2009 APNIC assigns four-byte AS numbers by default.
APNIC assigns two-byte AS numbers on request.
and ....
1 January 2010 APNIC ceases to make any distinction between two-
and four-byte AS numbers.
APNIC assigns from an undifferentiated four-
byte AS
number pool.
5. Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
------------------------------------------------
5.1 Advantages
- The greater awareness and the earlier delegation of 4-byte AS
numbers is expected to create greater demand on Service
Providers to
support 4-byte AS numbers.
- More 4-byte AS numbers will be seen in routing tables.
- Makes more service providers aware of their requirement to
support
4-byte AS numbers earlier.
- The extent of people unwilling to support 4-byte AS numbers
will be
known and documented. This will provide feedback as to the
state of
deployment and readiness to begin general assignments.
- Provides more pressure to vendors and Service Providers to
implement 4-byte code.
- Will encourage Service Providers to request 4-byte code from
their
vendors, and provides more pressure to equipment vendors and
Service Providers alike.
- Increase the chance of an orderly transistion when 4-byte AS
numbers are delegate as part of the general pool.
- Creates greater awareness of the need to support 4-byte AS
numbers
as more parties become in involved in the application for a 2-
byte
AS number.
5.2 Disadvantages
- Could create greater administrative overhead on APNIC staff.
6. Effect on APNIC members
---------------------------
The proposal impacts all APNIC members.
7. Effect on NIRs
------------------
The proposal has no direct impact on NIRs, but impacts members of
NIRs
in the same way it impacts APNIC members.
8. References
-------------
[1] Policies for Autonomous System number management in the Asia
Pacific
region
http://www.apnic.net/policy/asn-policy.html
_______________________________________________
Sig-policy-chair mailing list
Sig-policy-chair@apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management
policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
