Very good input, thank you Wilfried! Does anyone else have any suggestions or objections to:
"A new AS number is only assigned when the network architecture and/or project has a need that cannot be satisfied by an existing AS number." If there are no objections to this part of the text, that gives the WG a good foundation to build on in Bucharest, in my opinion. David David R Huberman Principal, Global IP Addressing Microsoft Corporation > -----Original Message----- > From: Wilfried Woeber [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 12:00 AM > To: David Huberman <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2014-03 Policy Proposal Withdrawn > (Remove Multihoming Requirement for AS Number Assignments) > > David Huberman wrote: > > > Thank you, ytti. > > > > So let's start with the basics. Does the following text allow the NCC to > > meet > the needs of network operators today? > > > > "A new AS number is only assigned when the network architecture > > I would be more edxplicit and more flexible here, by adding e.g. > > or project > > > has a need that cannot be satisfied with an existing AS number." > > Looking at SDN stuff and pilot projects or testbeds, or even trainings or > workshops, I can see the need to interconnect such projects with the 'real' > net and to use globally unique AS numbers. > > I do understanf that "network architecture" can be interpreted as a rather > wide and flexible term, but we should try to provide as good guidance as we > can to support the evaluation of requests by the IPRAs. > > Wilfried > > > There will be more policy text. But again, let's start with -- and agree on > > -- > the basics. > > > > Thanks! > > David > > > > David R Huberman > > Principal, Global IP Addressing > > Microsoft Corporation
