[address-policy-wg] Just FYI

Hi

To add a comment, the upstream you mentioned here, has at least 2 different ASN’s. In addition, Multihome doesn’t necessarily mean peering with the sole upstream but you can peer with others…

Cheers,
Reza

From: address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Shahab Vahabzadeh
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 1:22 PM
To: Saeed Khademi
Cc: address-policy-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Just FYI

Dear Saeed,
Thanks for this, But is there any to control this? In country like Iran in which you can only peer with your upstream.
What they can do?
Thanks

On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Saeed Khademi <saeed at ipm.ir<mailto:saeed at ipm.ir>> wrote:
Dear members,

During previous RIPE NCC Regional Meeting, I noticed that ( according to our instructor ) there are some organizations
having AS number while they do not have a multihome network.

According policy it is a mandatory requirement for having an ASN. Even in AS request form there is a mandatory field ( peers )
which requestor has to declare at least 2 peers, otherwise the request will not be processed by hostmaster.
and here:
http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/resource-management/allocations-and-assignments/request-an-as-number
it is clearly mentioned that “Current guidelines require a network to be multi-homed, and have a unique routing policy for an ASN to be assigned”

Now if it is really true that there are single-home organizations with ASN, isn’t it a wrong doing?

Kind Regards,
Saeed.




--
Regards,
Shahab Vahabzadeh, Network Engineer and System Administrator

Cell Phone: +1 (415) 871 0742
PGP Key Fingerprint = 1C43 988E 01A8 4D95 B662 9118 CD94 9F10 4DF4 6163



--

This email was Virus checked by Juniper Security Gateway.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20141122/41bb1dd5/attachment.html>