RE: [lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued
Tanya,
What would you suggest for a definition of "not in use"?
1st attempt (formally): "For an extended period of time [a] not used for the unique identification of one or more routing processes and/or relationships, on any EGP speaking device. No intent to used the AS number for any such purpose within an extended period of time [b]." [a] period t.b.d. by the community, but not shorter than 6 month [b] period t.b.d. by the community, but not shorter than 12 month 2nd attempt (down to earth approach :-) "Not used at all, no intent to use, simply sitting on as desk; or the entity no longer being aware of it's AS# holdership."
I agree that we do need to define "not in use".
:-) And by the way I agree that the community should _encourage_ recycling of AS numbers!
Tanya
Wwilfried.
What would you suggest for a definition of "not in use"?
1st attempt (formally):
"For an extended period of time [a] not used for the unique identification of one or more routing processes and/or relationships, on any EGP speaking device. No intent to used the AS number for any such purpose within an extended period of time [b]."
[a] period t.b.d. by the community, but not shorter than 6 month [b] period t.b.d. by the community, but not shorter than 12 month
I like this, but couldn't we refrase the last sentence to be "The intent is to start using the AS-number within [b] period of time, if that proves to not have been the case at [b] the AS-number will be revoked." Basically if they have no intent to use it for [b] we might revoke it immediatly. But what if that is "their" intent but it still does not happen? Best regards, - kurtis -
participants (2)
-
Kurt Erik Lindqvist -
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet