[address-policy-wg] 2014-03 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Remove Multihoming Requirement for AS Number Assignments)

Hi Saku,


> Extended communities are not transported in the Internet. So if I
> start new company and I want to sell IP transit, I'm competitively in
> disadvantageous position if I cannot market <myASN>:<action> traffic
> engineering policies to my customers.
> Sure I can use privateASN (and I must), but they are clearly less
> preferable on INET, and almost certainly won't cross many links.
>

Yes I totally agree here.


> I.e. 16b ASN is special and should be under more strict assignment
> policy, when living without BGP communities is hard.


Problem is the extremely low number of 16b ASN in the pool of every RIR.
Although RIPE NCC has a quarantine policy (if am not mistaken) with 000+
ASN in it (NCC can confirm). Strict assignment policy would be great but
BGP Communities can be simple justification to get 16b ASN and bypass any
hurdles isn't it?
-- 
Best Wishes,

Aftab A. Siddiqui
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20151110/c508b0a5/attachment.html>