[arin-ppml] AS Number Management Study by TU Delft

[Nachiket Kondhalkar]

Thanks for your contribution.

The primary motivation for this change was that both RIPE and APNIC noticed a large number of assigned ASNs that were not being advertised in the Global routing tables. Approximately 21% of all ASNs are functionally not participating in global routing.

By implementing an ASN fee, they hope to have these unused numbers returned to the RIR in order to prevent wastage in the long term.

Each have taken separate paths to execute this. RIPE has a flat €50 fee per ASN. While APNIC has gone for the first ASN to be free, but every subsequent one being charged AUD600. While APNIC policies might not impact hobby network growth in the future, RIPE policies might.

When ARIN implemented these fees, they were justified as being a more financial issue to stay afloat.

Definitely appreciate your perspective though.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dale W. Carder <dwcarder at es.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 6:19 PM
To: Nachiket Kondhalkar <N.B.Kondhalkar at student.tudelft.nl>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] AS Number Management Study by TU Delft

[You don't often get email from dwcarder at es.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]

Thus spake Nachiket Kondhalkar via ARIN-PPML (arin-ppml at arin.net) on Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 03:41:09PM +0000:
> Hello ARIN Policy community,
>
> APNIC and RIPE NCC have introduced an annual ASN maintenance fee from January 2025. As part of a research group currently studying AS Number management at TU Delft, we would like to understand the perspectives of network administrators in reference to this change. Your experience and expertise will help us understand and present the consensus of the community through our research.
>
> For more information about the study:
> https://blog/
> .apnic.net%2F2024%2F07%2F16%2Fa-comprehensive-review-of-rir-policies-i
> n-the-domain-of-asn-management%2F&data=05%7C02%7CN.B.Kondhalkar%40stud
> ent.tudelft.nl%7C9bca8712ff96494667b008dcabfc52e5%7C096e524d692940308c
> d38ab42de0887b%7C0%7C0%7C638574347408421839%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8ey
> JWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7
> C%7C%7C&sdata=vPZRPXCPOUzVzRkk4Y9PW%2Bt0G1rdTPV5N2oZKIJ8wh4%3D&reserve
> d=0

For some of your questions in the survey around the perception of scaling concerns, as I hope you are aware, there has been a large body of work previously in this space.  Probably the easiest thing to point to would be the old IRTF RRG: https://wiki.ietf.org/group/rrg

Dale