Dean, What you are saying is your rose coloured view of this.
"You say they can get an ASN anytime they need one for operation purposes". I am saying that the case exists that operators will want to do this - WITHOUT the requirement for being multi-homed. The requirement for being multi-homed, 'as written' causes members to either lie to provide false information or find a way around the restriction (using HE or someone else) to choose how they wish to manage their network. You choosing to ignore this use case or situation doesn't make it go away because you don't understand why they would want to manage their network in that way. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service ske...@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/v4now ; <http://twitter.com/networkceoau> linkedin.com/in/skeeve twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Dean Pemberton <d...@internetnz.net.nz> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Skeeve Stevens <ske...@v4now.com> wrote: > >> >> >> I'm asking that the policy reflect an operators choice to decide how they >> manage their networks should they choose to do it that way. >> >> >> > I believe we've entered the point of diminishing returns here. > > It has been shown multiple times in this thread that there is no barrier > to getting an ASN if one is required under the current policy. This fact > has been supported by the current hostmasters. Operators currently have > the freedom to choose how to manage their networks, they can choose to get > an ASN anytime they need one for operational purposes. > > There is no change in policy required. > > I strongly oppose this policy as written. > > >
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
