[arin-ppml] ARIN-2012-3: ASN Transfers - Last Call

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Tue May 8 12:21:29 EDT 2012

On May 8, 2012, at 9:41 AM, William Herrin wrote:

> Dissenter #1, would you consider a version in which the intended AS
> recipient is expected to show a technical justification for the
> transfer? What elements would the justification have? Would "because
> I'm using it on equipment that doesn't properly support 4-byte AS
> numbers when no 2-byte AS numbers are otherwise available" be an
> acceptable justification?

Note that present technical justification for an AS number is based
on verification that the organization meets one of the following:

   • A unique routing policy (its policy differs from its border gateway peers)
   • A multihomed site.

Under 2012-3 as written, this requirement would continue apply, although it 
is generally acknowledged to be a fairly low bar to meet. I believe that 
you are suggesting the possibility of an additional technical requirement
which would apply solely for ASN transfers.

I have no view on this option, but wanted to make sure that the current 
technical requirements for ASN issuance are noted in this discussion.

> Dissenter #2, would you consider the proposal with a sunset date, so
> that if your fears prove founded the onus is on the proponents to to
> convince folks to re-up the policy instead of on you to repleal it? If
> no evidence supporting those fears appears by the sunset date, could
> you then accept making the policy permanent? What would get you to a
> comfort zone where even if you don't see a driving need for the policy
> you could determine that it does no harm?
> Sure we all hate sunset dates but is that really such a hard pill to
> swallow when straying into the unknown?

Sunset dates are indeed possible in policy, but do also set us up for
precipitous uncertainty unless there is an shared understanding of the
potential risks that are being hedged against.  In this manner, as the
deadline approaches, everyone has some common understanding of some of
the issues that to be reviewed in the policy discussions on that will
inevitably occur approaching sunset.  This is consideration in thinking 
about using sunset clauses in policy (since we generally want to avoid
uncertainty in number resource policy), but folks should feel free to 
specify them if it makes for better policy.

> And so on. We won't get to zero dissenters; the group is too large.
> But we can do better than where we are with it today.

Full agreement and thanks for encouraging discussion!

John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list