[sig-policy] Final Comment Period for prop-128: Multihomingnot required for A SN

  • To: "sig-policy" <sig-policy@apnic.net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] Final Comment Period for prop-128: Multihomingnot required for A SN
  • From: "chku" <chku@twnic.net.tw>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 13:44:28 +0800 (CST)
  • Delivered-to: sig-policy@clove.apnic.net
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=twnic.net.tw; s=tw168; t=1551332670; bh=eZv2D4nJMtz+yHVkXe0o43tBU/PIfK7pfJt1dZDQ6uA=; l=5134; h=From:Subject:Message-ID:To:Date:MIME-Version; b=j+i+6QejYqKsCExBHtH3nuyGp8KNiVCkrKt1N5vtIpIko+77Mzcf0Is43HVD+NoiU nHk93XZx/GkqettQRshijzaPoEL27Wl23rFu3bGWt+nvMy7+RR0wvW4/GNCt72lXoK tWspsJuXeuvIChyQjoLBj563Fe4mg3yCZUtuaQ5c=
  • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/>
  • List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
  • List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
  • List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
  • List-subscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
  • Reply-to: chku <chku@twnic.net.tw>

    • Dear colleagues
      
      Version 1 of prop-128: Multihoming not required for ASN, reached 
      consensus at the APNIC 47 Open Policy Meeting and later at the APNIC 
      Annual General Meeting (AGM).
      
      This proposal will now move to the next step in the APNIC Policy
      Development Process and is being returned to the Policy SIG mailing list
      for the final Comment Period.
      
      - Deadline for comments:  23:59 (UTC +10) Thursday, 28 March 2019
      
      Proposal details, including the full text of the proposal, history, and
      links to previous versions are available at:
      
      https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-128/
      
      Regards
      Sumon, Ching-Heng, Bertrand
      Policy SIG Chairs
      
      
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      
      prop-128-v001: Multihoming not required for ASN
      
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      
      Proposers: Jordi Palet Martínez
                  jordi.palet@theipv6company.com
      
      
      1. Problem Statement
      --------------------
      
      When the ASN assignment policy was originally designed, the reliability
      of networks was not so good as today. So, at that time, it was making
      sense to make sure that and ASN holder is multihomed.
      
      However, today this is not necessarily a reasonable requirement, and
      even in some cases, some networks may require an ASN and not willing
      to be multihomed (because the cost, or remote locations that have only
      a single upstream, etc.), and their SLA requirements don’t need that
      redundancy.
      
      The deployment of IPv6 also increase the need for organizations which
      are not ISPs, to obtain IPv6 PI in order to have stable addresses,
      and in that situation, ideally, they should announce their PI space
      with their own ASN. In most cases, they don’t have to be multihomed.
      
      
      
      2. Objective of policy change
      -----------------------------
      
      To ensure that organizations which have their own routing policy and
      the need to interconnect with other organizations, can do it.
      
      Interconnect is used here with the commonly understood meaning of
      establishing a connection between two (administratively) separate
      networks.
      
      
      3. Situation in other regions
      -----------------------------
      
      ARIN and LACNIC don’t require multihoming. RIPE requires it. AfriNIC has
      a policy equivalent to APNIC, but I’m submitting a proposal similar to
      this one to change it as well as in the case of RIPE.
      
      
      4. Proposed policy solution
      ---------------------------
      
      Current Policy text
      
      12.1. Evaluation of eligibility
      
      An organization is eligible for an ASN assignment if:
      - it is currently multihomed, or
      - it holds previously-allocated provider independent address space and 
      intends to multihome in the future.
      
      An organization will also be eligible if it can demonstrate that it will 
      meet the above criteria upon receiving an ASN (or within a reasonably 
      short time thereafter).
      
      Requests for ASNs under these criteria will be evaluated using the 
      guidelines described in RFC1930 'Guidelines for the creation, selection 
      and registration of an Autonomous System' (AS).
      
      
      Proposed text
      
      12.1. Evaluation of eligibility
      
      An organization is eligible for an ASN assignment if:
      - it is multihomed or
      - has the need to interconnect with other AS.
      
      An organization will also be eligible if it can demonstrate that it will 
      meet any
      of the above criteria upon receiving an ASN (or within a reasonably 
      short time thereafter).
      
      Requests for ASNs under these criteria will be evaluated using the 
      guidelines described in RFC1930 'Guidelines for the creation, selection 
      and registration of
      an Autonomous System' (AS).
      
      
      5. Advantages / Disadvantages
      -----------------------------
      
      Advantages:
      Fulfilling the objectives above indicated.
      
      Disadvantages:
      None foreseen.
      
      
      6. Impact on resource holders
      -----------------------------
      
      None.
      
      
      7. References
      -------------
      
      https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#five
      https://www.lacnic.net/683/2/lacnic/
      https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-679