Name: Julião Braga
Email: juliao@braga.eti.br
Organization: Submissão Independente

Name: Julião Braga
Email: juliao@braga.eti.br
Organization: Submissão Independente

Name: Patricia Endo
Email: patricia.endo@upe.br
Organization: Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

This Policy Proposal seeks to eliminate the reference to a provider's "multihomed or non-multihomed status," thus also eliminating the requirement which states "at least 50% of the requested address space" and replacing this text with "25% of the requested address space."

This Ppolicy Pproposal seeks to eliminate theall references to an providerganization's "“multihomed” or “non-multihomed” status," thus also weliminl atings the requirement which statesing "“at least 50% of the requested address space"” and replstacndardizing thise trext wquirementh as "25% of the requested address space.".

The considerations behind this proposal are listed below:

1. Technology has advanced and traffic failures and / or Internet noise have been greatly reduced.

2. It's not necessary for traffic redundancy to be local, as remote physical redundancy has a similar effect considering that transit providers themselves build traffic redundancy in their own networks.

3. Physical and/or economic limitations exist in remote areas that make redundancy not viable.

The considerations balehind for thise proposal are list described below:.

1. TCurrent technology has advranstically red anuced traffic failures and / or Internet noise have been greatly reduced.

2. It's not necessary for tTraffic redundancy tis not bnecessarily local, as remote physical redundancy has a similar effect considwhering thate transffitc providers themselveis brouild ghtraffic redundancy into the pictur own networks.

3. PIn remote areas there are physical and / or economic limpediments that mean that redundancy is not feasible. The lack of economic viability affects thex communisties involved and premvents their use of the aInterneat, thus thaurting makthe universal dedsire for undiversal ancycess nto the viabWorld Wide Web.

Considering the reasons above, this proposal seeks to remove the word "multihomed" and the requirement which mentions "at least a 50% of the requested address space", harmonizing the requirement as "25% of the requested address space".

This 50% appears in section 2.3.3.1 and the following text should be removed:

"If the applicant is a non-multihomed ISP:
Efficient utilization of at least 50% of the requested address space (contiguous or not)."

The term "multihomed" appears in sections 2.3.3.1, 2.3.3.3 and 2.3.3.4.3, and should be removed without exception.

CThe following changesi should madering to the reasPolicy Mansual:

a. Replabovce, the followisng ptext froposalm seeksction 2.3.3.1.2:

“In addition, rdempending ovf the multihomed word "non-multihomed" status of the applyindg ISP, the following requirements wshall be considered:
If the applicant is a multihomed ISP, is planning to become one, or has interconnection needs:

Efficient "utilization of at least a 250% of the requested address space", harm(coniztinguous or not). If the requappliremecant ais "25%multihomed, ospecify the rnameqs and auetonomous systedm addnumberes of its spacrovide"rs.

T If this 50%e appelicarnt is planning sto become multihomed or needs 2.3.3.1to interconnect with other autonomous systems, describe in detail the fcollrrespownding plan and timeline (prexsenting shigned contracts our ldetters of bintent is recomovmended:).

"If the applicant is a non-multihomed ISP:

Efficient utilization of at least 50% of the requested address space (contiguous or not)."”

to:

T“In addition, the tfollowing requirements "mushall be considered tio thomed" the applying ISP:

Efficient utilization of at least 25% of the requested inaddress space (contiguonus 2or not).3.3.1,

Specify 2.3.3.3the nand 2.3.3.4.3,mes and numbers of the autonomoulds bsystem of its premoviders.

If the applicant needs to interconnect with other autonomous systexms, describe in detail the corresponding plan and timeline (presenting signed contracts or letters of intent is recommended).

Considering the reasons above, this proposal seeks to remove the word "multihomed" and the requirement which mentions "at least a 50% of the requested address space", harmonizing the requirement as "25% of the requested address space".

This 50% appears in section 2.3.3.1 and the following text should be removed:

"If the applicant is a non-multihomed ISP:
Efficient utilization of at least 50% of the requested address space (contiguous or not)."

The term "multihomed" appears in sections 2.3.3.1, 2.3.3.3 and 2.3.3.4.3, and should be removed without exception.

CThe following changesi should madering to the reasPolicy Mansual:

a. Replabovce, the followisng ptext froposalm seeksction 2.3.3.1.2:

“In addition, rdempending ovf the multihomed word "non-multihomed" status of the applyindg ISP, the following requirements wshall be considered:
If the applicant is a multihomed ISP, is planning to become one, or has interconnection needs:

Efficient "utilization of at least a 250% of the requested address space", harm(coniztinguous or not). If the requappliremecant ais "25%multihomed, ospecify the rnameqs and auetonomous systedm addnumberes of its spacrovide"rs.

T If this 50%e appelicarnt is planning sto become multihomed or needs 2.3.3.1to interconnect with other autonomous systems, describe in detail the fcollrrespownding plan and timeline (prexsenting shigned contracts our ldetters of bintent is recomovmended:).

"If the applicant is a non-multihomed ISP:

Efficient utilization of at least 50% of the requested address space (contiguous or not)."”

to:

T“In addition, the tfollowing requirements "mushall be considered tio thomed" the applying ISP:

Efficient utilization of at least 25% of the requested inaddress space (contiguonus 2or not).3.3.1,

Specify 2.3.3.3the nand 2.3.3.4.3,mes and numbers of the autonomoulds bsystem of its premoviders.

If the applicant needs to interconnect with other autonomous systexms, describe in detail the corresponding plan and timeline (presenting signed contracts or letters of intent is recommended).

N. A.

N. A.

Section 2 of the Policy Manual (v2.5 14 Dec. 205)

SItectionm 2. dof Manual thde Políticy Manuals (v2.56 014 Dec. /08/20516)