[address-policy-wg] 2014-03 two cents on multi homing ASN requirement
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-03 two cents on multi homing ASN requirement
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-03 two cents on multi homing ASN requirement
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Job Snijders
job at instituut.net
Sat Aug 16 17:46:34 CEST 2014
On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 05:36:46PM +0200, Erik Bais wrote: > Policy can't set a price or affect the cost to a resource, as that is > decided by the membership in the AGM. Yes I know, hence my presenting of these two paths forward. > I would rather have the NCC monitor the situation and report on it > during the NCC services update on the RIPE meetings as they are also > doing on the PI IPv6 without multihoming. If the situation would show > abusive behaviour from people, the need is there to associate a cost > per AS object and you would get it much easier through the AGM ... > > I would not recommend writing a policy that would only be implemented > after a cost decision. And by writing that the Currently policy must > stay as is, also doesn't leave an option to make other adjustments.. Noted. > May I suggest the policy change that was discussed to be able to > transfer an ASn. Do you have an URL? What about the option 2, to limit the amount of AS assignments per LIR to 1000? As far as I understand option would fall within APWG's mandate and address the raised concerns. Kind regards, Job
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-03 two cents on multi homing ASN requirement
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-03 two cents on multi homing ASN requirement
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]