[address-policy-wg] 32-bit AS Number status?
Filiz Yilmaz filiz at ripe.net
Fri Jan 29 10:44:07 CET 2010
Dear Shane, During RIPE 58, Daniel Karrenberg has made a presentation, titled "32- bit ASN Take-Up Report, Policy Adjustments Needed?". You can find the presentation at the archives at http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-58/content/presentations/asn32-take-up-report.pdf Slide 5 of the presentation relates to your question. The RIPE NCC proposed that the method of assigning ASNs that was employed in 2009 should continue after 1 January 2010. This means that all assignments will be for 32-bit only ASNs by default, unless a 16-bit ASN is specifically requested. The AP WG agreed with this proposal. You can find the records of this at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-58/meeting-report.php and http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/address-policy/r58-minutes.html I hope this helps. Kind regards, Filiz Yilmaz Policy Development Manager RIPE NCC On 28 Jan 2010, at 18:29, Shane Kerr wrote: > All, > > I noticed that the proposed updated AS Number policy was sent to the > address-policy-wg recently. > > There is a timeline for 32-bit AS Number in both the old and new > versions, which says: > > "From 1 January 2010 the RIPE NCC will cease to make any distinction > between 16-bit AS Numbers and 32-bit only AS Numbers, and will operate > AS Number assignments from an undifferentiated 32-bit AS Number > allocation pool." > > I'm not sure exactly what this means, but I think it is supposed to > mean > that people get 32-bit AS Numbers now. Did this happen? > > If it didn't, why not? Do we need to change "2010" to "2011"? Is it > ever > going to happen? > > If it did, was there any effect? I mean both from humans (angry LIRs, > peasants marching on the castle with torches, riots in the streets), > or > on the Intertubes (ugly routing artifacts, mass reboots of boxes with > old firmware, monitoring systems gone wild)? > > Just wondering. :) > > -- > Shane >