Agreed that this should be updated to illustrate that BGP is an example. Whilst it may be the most likely candidate currently, new and emerging technologies may come along :)
Michael ------------------------------ *Michael B. Williams * Glexia - An IT Company Book a Meeting With Me <https://calendly.com/glexia-michael-williams> USA Direct: +1 978 477 6797 USA Toll Free: +1 800 675 0297 x101 AUS Direct: +61 3 8594 2265 AUS Toll Free: +61 1800 931 724 x101 Fax: +1.815-301-5570 [email protected] https://www.glexia.com/ Legal Notice: The information in this electronic mail message is the sender's confidential business and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to this internet electronic mail message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful. On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 11:48 PM John Santos <[email protected]> wrote: > I tend to agree with Scott. In particular, the rewording proposed by > Chris > would make using BGP the ONLY protocol that would require a unique AS > number, as > opposed to the original wording and Scott's version, which would make BGP > an > example of such a situation. > > > > On 7/20/2021 11:29 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 12:52 PM ARIN <[email protected] <mailto: > [email protected]>> wrote: > > [...] > > Another way to address the issue Chris raised here would be to just add > the word > > "with" before Border Gateway Protocol, so it reads "...using a unique > routing > > policy, such as with Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) ..." > > [...] > > “AS Numbers should be requested when an organization has network > plans ready > > and is either planning to use a unique routing policy (such as BGP) > or has a > > unique need for an AS Number.” > > > > > > Adding "with", so it reads "(such as with BGP)" would also be a good > > clarification here. > > > > -Scott > > (Something wonky with the quoting happened above; I think my email client > lost a > layer of >'s, and the deleted quoted text from the ARIN announcement had > lots of > underscores where there should have been text, making it almost > unreadable. I > hope people can get my point from context. Unfortunately, I already > deleted > Chris's email so I don't have the revised proposal in front of me to paste > back in.) > > -- > John Santos > Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. > 781-861-0670 ext 539 > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
