[arin-ppml] ASN transfers...

Martin Hannigan hannigan at gmail.com
Tue Sep 20 11:35:09 EDT 2011


On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Randy Whitney <randy.whitney at verizon.com>wrote:

> On 9/20/2011 10:55 AM, David Williamson wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 04:35:20PM +0200, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>>
>>> There are legacy ASN's. There is policy to transfer legacy resources
>>> "assets". The language in 8.x doesn't discern between IP addresses or
>>> ASN''s.
>>>
>>> Why not?
>>>
>>
>> That's obvious, is it not?  :-)  Clearly an oversight, given the
>> fixation on legacy addresses.  Perhaps 8.x needs a glossary/preamble
>> with some definitions.  The intent of that section is clear, even if
>> the language is a bit vague in defining "legacy resources".  I just
>> don't see why someone would want to transfer an ASN outside of normal
>> business transactions.  Perhaps due to some misplaced sense of
>> importance around a lower number?  In any case, this feels like a minor
>> issue.  A brief editorial proposal could resolve it, and would seem
>> likely to get a lot of support.
>>
>
> I can see a few reasons why generically one might want to be able to
> transfer an ASN, rather than request a new one:
>
> - Legacy hardware lacks proper support for Four Byte ASNs
> - Lower ASN implies older, more established network
> - Perhaps a choice ASN comes up for grabs
> - Chance or Opportunity to maintain Peering Relationships on ASN
>
> I support adding ASNs into the mix.
>


Same here, but hopefully it doesn't require a policy proposal to get it
done.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110920/d0a039da/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list