[sig-policy] Policy Outcomes from LACNIC 22
- To: Policy Mailing List <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
- Subject: [sig-policy] Policy Outcomes from LACNIC 22
- From: Adam Gosling <adam at apnic dot net>
- Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 05:37:27 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US, en-AU
- Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apnic.net; s=c3po; h=received:received:from:to:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date:message-id: accept-language:content-language:x-ms-has-attach:x-ms-tnef-correlator: x-originating-ip:content-type:mime-version; bh=xp0TPFylZrlG3gN/RjUUIgjwNge6TW2t8hGyaDBDmN4=; b=aHlccleVg1bX1bvGF2LMSxa7RPSPsYPBbnfjg5NNk3/YlUMDakgACdTIz/62FprKjJJWELZbPCboH Q+vnB2yl20BMhSIJLgE3b8r0Giws12TpNo+SlA38t1mvjgWiBbiK5oR6xI5dGLbzYqMFfHcsX9LoHF TCBybIElDigEQfes=
- List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com?subject=help>
- List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- Thread-index: AQHQCHHlz8qxla21iES4W0Q1ELGmJA==
Dear SIG Members
In its recent LACNIC 22 meeting, from 27-31 October in Santiago Chile, the LACNIC community considered two policy proposals.
The first, a proposal to change the LACNIC PDP, failed to reach consensus and was returned to the list. The rationale for the proposal is to respond to "Non-compliances with the policy development process as it is now defined have been observed, particularly in regard to the specified dates/timeline". It also seeks to implement an appeals process in case a member of the community feels affected by decisions made during the policy development and adoption process.
The second is LAC-2014-2: Modification to the text describing ASN distribution requirements reached consensus and is now in a final comment period.
The proposal changes the ASN delegation criteria in such a way that the multi-homing requirement is no longer a requirement. If passed, the policy would require only that an network operator needs to interconnect with one other network ASN that has a different routing policy to its own.