发生了什么变化
该提案拟免除首次申请 ASN 的理由说明,同时保留额外 ASN 的申请条件。1.0 版于2025年5月6日发布;2025年10月16日发布的2.0版进一步明确了额外 ASN 的路由策略文档、使用与审查条件。提案于2026年7月6日撤回,这些拟议修改不能视为已实施的规则。
RIPE NCC · RIR 观察
从这里开始,逐项查看提案记录:发生了哪些变化、为何重要、各方提出了什么主张、立场如何演变、最终作出了什么决定,以及证据仍存在哪些缺口。
来源事实
究竟是谁影响了这场辩论?
BTW 分析
该提案拟免除首次申请 ASN 的理由说明,同时保留额外 ASN 的申请条件。1.0 版于2025年5月6日发布;2025年10月16日发布的2.0版进一步明确了额外 ASN 的路由策略文档、使用与审查条件。提案于2026年7月6日撤回,这些拟议修改不能视为已实施的规则。
草案讨论的核心是便利准入与核实路由需求之间的边界:多宿主要求是否可执行、额外 ASN 应如何说明必要性,以及哪些运行证据足以支持这些规则。索要数据或修改措辞,不一定意味着反对简化准入。
已关联的32封邮件来自2025年3月29日至4月2日的草案讨论,早于两个正式发布版本。不能把它们当成对10月文本的投票,也不能据此解释2026年7月的撤回。撤回是程序结果,不代表提案已成为政策。
8人贡献了这32封邮件,发言最多的5人占邮件总数的84.4%。这说明讨论集中在谁身上,并不能证明这些人代表所有受影响的运营者,或拥有决定结果的权力。
如果提案获采纳,首次申请 ASN 的理由审查将取消,而额外申请仍需接受审查。其取舍是降低准入阻力,同时继续核实后续申请。由于提案已撤回,不能把这种行政裁量权的拟议调整写成已发生的变化。
General ASN requirements separated from additional-ASN requests · Version 2 places a unique external routing policy, a RIPE Database routing-policy entry and third-party peering under a general ASNs are required to heading, then separately lists what an additional-ASN applicant must provide. The first ASN remains available without application justification. That does not mean the revised operative text exempts the first ASN from every operational requirement, despite the broader wording retained in the rationale.
Requirements for additional ASNs are: A unique external routing policy for the Autonomous System must be provided. The uniqueness of the routing policy includes the announced prefixes. The Autonomous System must peer with a third party.来源事实 ↗
Have a unique external routing policy. The uniqueness of the routing policy includes the announced prefixes. Have a routing policy defined in the RIPE Database. Peer with a third party.来源事实 ↗
Routing-policy registration and off-GRT documentation · The old wording requests a routing policy for an ASN intended to appear in the global routing table and recommends RPSL. Version 2 instead requires a policy defined in the RIPE Database in the general ASN conditions and omits the explicit RPSL recommendation. Documentation of a non-visible purpose remains required for an ASN used outside the global routing table.
When requesting an AS Number to be visible in the Global Routing Table (GRT), the routing policy of the Autonomous System must be provided. The new unique routing policy should be defined in RPSL language, as used in the RIPE Database.来源事实 ↗
Have a routing policy defined in the RIPE Database. Peer with a third party. In case the ASN is used for a purpose that is not visible in the GRT, documentation on the non-visible purpose (e.g., a reference to the assigned IXP LAN prefixes) must be provided.来源事实 ↗
Six-month use expectation and intermittent use · Version 2 replaces the mandatory fulfilment of approved application criteria within six months with a should-be-in-use expectation over the same period. It describes intermittent research, measurement and event uses as subject to RIPE NCC discretion and still requires a benefit statement. The interval is unchanged, while the wording and the explicit discretion differ.
Reasonable periodic use cases may be allowed. A benefit statement for such must be provided. The requester must fulfil the criteria for which the application was approved within six months after the ASN is issued.来源事实 ↗
ASNs should be in use within six months after the ASN is issued. Intermittent usage such as research, measurements, events, etc. may be allowed at the discretion of the RIPE NCC. A benefit statement for such usage must be provided.来源事实 ↗
Justification for leaving existing ASNs inactive · Version 2 explicitly requires an additional-ASN requester to explain why inactive existing ASNs cannot be used. Approval may still depend on compliance by existing ASNs, now expressly at RIPE NCC discretion; the old separate reference to up-to-date documentation in that approval sentence is removed.
Approval of an additional ASN may depend on the fulfilment of criteria and up-to-date documentation for existing ASNs.来源事实 ↗
A reason for why inactive existing ASNs cannot be used. Approval of an additional ASN may depend on the fulfilment of ASN requirements for existing ASNs, at the discretion of the RIPE NCC.来源事实 ↗
Detailed verification procedure omitted · Version 2 omits the old instructions to verify visible ASNs through the global routing table, request operational proof for off-table ASNs, and treat insufficient proof as failure. It retains discretion over approval based on existing ASN requirements. The omission changes the prescribed verification detail; it does not establish that RIPE NCC can no longer check compliance.
In case of an ASN visible in the GRT, RIPE NCC verifies that the ASN fulfils the criteria by checking the GRT. In case of an off-GRT ASN, RIPE NCC may request operational proof that the criteria are fulfilled. Failing to provide sufficient proof is considered as not fulfilling the criteria.来源事实 ↗
Approval of an additional ASN may depend on the fulfilment of ASN requirements for existing ASNs, at the discretion of the RIPE NCC.来源事实 ↗
加载中
部分
最早收录: 1992年6月30日
最近收录: 2026年11月3日