Re: [Idr] WGLC on draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-00

[David Farmer <[e-mail]>]

On 11/29/12 11:50 , Jared Mauch wrote:
> Robert,
>
> On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:36 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:
...
>> Applications and services folks will say "We just find BGP useful to
>> our application, why not use it - we have nothing in common with big
>> I"
>>
>> On that basis I see no harm in allowing some bigger AS space for personal use.
>>
>> In fact I just looked at various RIR policies (some of them written by
>> Geoff ;) which say that given LIR can get only single AS number
>> allocation - even for experiments. Moreover RIRs get 1K AS pools from
>> IANA and there are clear rules where the subsequent pool can be
>> requested.
>
> These policies are community driven, and could be changed.  I'm not saying they are right or wrong, but if you have collisions in numbering, you should get unique space to properly work around it vs using a hack.
....

To this point, yes the RIR policies could be changed and I would support 
that.  However, the RIR's current policies are based on technical 
recommendations of this community in RFC 1930, and can be summarized as 
essentially one ASN per org and large by comparison block of shared 
Private-Use ASNs, for internal use.  Furthermore, I don't see the RIRs 
changing their policies without IDR updating its technical recommendations.

This Draft simply extends the technical direction of RFC 1930 to provide 
a larger block of Privete-Use ASNs, now that 4-byte ASNs make that 
possible.  By the way, that can't be done by the RIRs, this must be done 
by the IETF as technical allocations like this are in its domain.

However, if you are saying that the technical recommendations of RFC 
1930 are no longer valid or preferred;  And, IDR would prefer that large 
unique blocks of ASNs be handed out to organizations solely for internal 
use, then IDR should provide updated technical recommendations to that 
effect for the RIR policy community to consider.

In my view IDR either needs to do its job and expand technical 
allocation for the Private-Use ASNs or deprecate the technical 
recommendations of RFC 1930 in this regard.  Providing new 
recommendations against the use of Private ASNs all together and that 
large blocks of ASNs should be allocated and registered solely for 
internal use within organizations by the RIRs.  If IDR can't agree on 
one of those two alternatives, then IDR needs to stop extending BGP and 
develop a new protocol to handle all the new applications that are being 
bolted onto BGP.

Thanks.

-- 
================================================
David Farmer               Email: [e-mail]
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE     Phone: [phone]
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029  Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================