[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - July 2009
scottleibrand at gmail.com
Tue Jul 21 14:42:22 EDT 2009
Martin Hannigan wrote:
>> The AC abandoned the following policy proposal:
>> Policy Proposal 87: Extend 16 bit ASN Assignments
>> The AC stated, "Proposal #87: Extend 16 bit ASN Assignments has been
>> abandoned by the AC because the ARIN staff has now made an
>> implementation plan to combine both sets of numbers into one pool, and
>> issue in numerical order starting with the lowest numbers first
>> (starting in January 2010). With this plan in place the intention of
>> this proposal is addressed and the need for this proposal no longer
> Can someone explain how this will work please?
I can try, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong...
Up until January 1 2010, ARIN distinguishes between 2-byte and 4-byte
ASNs, and lets you have a 2-byte if you need it, but gives out 4-bytes
otherwise, to spur adoption.
After January 1 2010, ARIN ceases to make any distinction between 2-byte
and 4-byte ASNs. Instead, they simply give out ASNs as they always
have, working up from the bottom. At first, the ASNs given out will be
<64k. Eventually, when that block of ASNs is used up, they'll move on
to higher numbers >64k. Presumably by then everyone with a growing
network will have rolled out code to support 4-byte ASNs.
More information about the ARIN-PPML