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

[Nachiket Kondhalkar]

Hi everyone,

The survey is only meant to measure the consensus in the community. We are going to group the survey responses by region and create a ‘before’ picture so to speak.

Ideally speaking, this research needs to happen at each RIR as each of them come with their own challenges. From the interviews we’ve had so far, LACNIC and AFRINIC are not particularly concerned with ASN management at the moment. We want to anticipate the potential impact of these policy changes before they go into effect. Which is why the interviews are so important. The survey itself cannot possibly capture the diversity of opinions around the world. We are only trying to roughly estimate the consensus through it.

So, I invite everyone to share their perspective so we can identify potential issues. As far as the bias is concerned, I am but human. But as a researcher my work shall be, to the best of my ability, free of bias.

Kind regards,
Nachiket

From: Dominik Dobrowolski <dominikdobrowolski.co at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 6:52 PM
To: Nachiket Kondhalkar <N.B.Kondhalkar at student.tudelft.nl>
Cc: Dale W. Carder <dwcarder at es.net>; arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] AS Number Management Study by TU Delft

You don't often get email from dominikdobrowolski.co at gmail.com<mailto:dominikdobrowolski.co at gmail.com>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
Let me ask one more question,

You intend to use the questionnaire for a research work right?

What do you want to prove by it?

Because it is clear by your RIPE 88 speech, as by your tone here that you have a bias. Cherry picking the evidence you need is not a research work.

Kind Regards,


On Wed, Jul 24, 2024, 6:21 PM Nachiket Kondhalkar via ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>> wrote:
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<mailto:dwcarder at es.net>>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 6:19 PM
To: Nachiket Kondhalkar <N.B.Kondhalkar at student.tudelft.nl<mailto:N.B.Kondhalkar at student.tudelft.nl>>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<http://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<http://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

_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20240724/17bfd5db/attachment-0001.htm>