Route Server Filters at IXPs and 4-byte ASNs
Jeffrey Haas
jhaas at pfrc.org
Wed Feb 5 13:52:03 UTC 2014
Martin,
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 10:06:31AM +0100, Martin Pels wrote:
> > Wide communities is the wrong tool here. You want this:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype-06
>
> This draft does not cater for the use case of describing a 32-bit ASN peering
> with a 32-bit route server, which would require a 4-byte Global Administrator
> as well as a 4-byte Local Administrator sub-field.
I think that's the first clear articulation I've read about why some people
want wide comms vs. a simple replacement for existing regular communities as
extended communities. Thanks.
Wide comms can do that, but they're intended to be a somewhat bigger hammer.
This case is probably worth chatting with the authors and others in IDR at
IETF to see if we should do something simpler.
-- Jeff
More information about the NANOG
mailing list