as numbers

Sun Jul 31 05:23:33 UTC 2005

At 01:12 AM 7/31/2005, you wrote:
This kind of response does have a certain market-based logic to it, I must 
admit, but its highly risky. I don't think its all that wise for this to be 
delayed indefinitely until the point at which its turning from an orderly 
transition into a last second panic, and I don't think that many customers 
will place this high on their vendor support priority list until they are 
actually allocated a 4-byte AS number because the 2-byte pool has been 
exhausted. .

>So - to NANOG at large - if you want your vendor to include 4-Byte AS 
>support in their BGP code anytime soon, in order to avoid some last minute 
>panic in a couple of years hence, then it would appear that you should 
>talk to them now and say clearly that you want 4-Byte AS support in your 
>BGP software right now.

I agree that implementation sooner rather than later is a good idea, but 
all of us already have a 2-Byte AS so although we care in theory and 
believe it is a good idea, we don't _really_ care as much as the first guy 
who gets a 4-Byte AS will. Eventually one of our BGP speaking transit 
customers will be assigned these AS numbers and other newer providers will 
too, but unless someone plans to chop up their network or split into two 
companies, I don't see that there will be much clamoring for this - yet. 
When we can't provide connectivity to a potential customer because we can't 
accept or wrap up their 4B AS, then there will be demand. Just some food 
for thought...

-R

Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection
http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211
"Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin