[ncc-services-wg] Re: [routing-wg]Re: [address-policy-wg] 32-bit AS Number status?

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Filiz Yilmaz wrote:

> Dear Shane,
>
> During RIPE 58, Daniel Karrenberg has made a presentation, titled "32-bit ASN 
> Take-Up Report, Policy Adjustments Needed?".
> You can find the presentation at the archives at 
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-58/content/presentations/asn32-take-up-report.pdf
>
> Slide 5 of the presentation relates to your question. The RIPE NCC proposed 
> that the method of assigning ASNs that was employed in 2009 should continue 
> after 1 January 2010. This means that all assignments will be for 32-bit only 
> ASNs by default, unless a 16-bit ASN is specifically requested. The AP WG 
> agreed with this proposal.

Does the RIPE NCC consider a slide in a presentation as proper 
documentation for revised ASN assignment procedures?

-Hank

>
> You can find the records of this at:
>
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-58/meeting-report.php
> and
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/address-policy/r58-minutes.html
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Filiz Yilmaz
> Policy Development Manager
> RIPE NCC
>
>
> On 28 Jan 2010, at 18:29, Shane Kerr wrote:
>
>> All,
>> 
>> I noticed that the proposed updated AS Number policy was sent to the
>> address-policy-wg recently.
>> 
>> There is a timeline for 32-bit AS Number in both the old and new
>> versions, which says:
>> 
>> "From 1 January 2010 the RIPE NCC will cease to make any distinction
>> between 16-bit AS Numbers and 32-bit only AS Numbers, and will operate
>> AS Number assignments from an undifferentiated 32-bit AS Number
>> allocation pool."
>> 
>> I'm not sure exactly what this means, but I think it is supposed to mean
>> that people get 32-bit AS Numbers now. Did this happen?
>> 
>> If it didn't, why not? Do we need to change "2010" to "2011"? Is it ever
>> going to happen?
>> 
>> If it did, was there any effect? I mean both from humans (angry LIRs,
>> peasants marching on the castle with torches, riots in the streets), or
>> on the Intertubes (ugly routing artifacts, mass reboots of boxes with
>> old firmware, monitoring systems gone wild)?
>> 
>> Just wondering. :)
>> 
>> --
>> Shane
>> 
>