[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2021-3: Private AS Number and Unique Routing Policy Clarifications

[John Santos]

I tend to agree with Scott.  In particular, the rewording proposed by Chris 
would make using BGP the ONLY protocol that would require a unique AS number, as 
opposed to the original wording and Scott's version, which would make BGP an 
example of such a situation.



On 7/20/2021 11:29 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 12:52 PM ARIN <info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net>> wrote:
> [...]
> Another way to address the issue Chris raised here would be to just add the word 
> "with" before Border Gateway Protocol, so it reads "...using a unique routing 
> policy, such as with Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) ..."
> [...]
>     “AS Numbers should be requested when an organization has network plans ready
>     and is either planning to use a unique routing policy (such as BGP) or has a
>     unique need for an AS Number.”
> 
> 
> Adding "with", so it reads "(such as with BGP)" would also be a good 
> clarification here.
> 
> -Scott

(Something wonky with the quoting happened above; I think my email client lost a 
layer of >'s, and the deleted quoted text from the ARIN announcement had lots of 
underscores where there should have been text, making it almost unreadable.  I 
hope people can get my point from context.  Unfortunately, I already deleted 
Chris's email so I don't have the revised proposal in front of me to paste back in.)

-- 
John Santos
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
781-861-0670 ext 539