AW: that 4byte ASN you were considering...

Gunther Stammwitz gstammw at gmx.net
Tue Oct 10 12:29:11 UTC 2006


> 
> >My point is that if we do NOT introduce a special notation 
> for ASnums 
> >greater than 65536, then tools only need to be checked, not 
> updated. If 
> >your tool was written by someone who left the company 7 
> years ago then 
> >you might want to do such checking by simply testing it with 
> large as 
> >numbers, not by inspecting the code. The dot notation requires that 
> >somebody goes in and updates/fixes all these old tools.
> 
> I don't agree with you but this is a valid argument.  I 
> suggest you make it to the IESG before they decide.
> 
> Henk
> 
Yes, I agree too. Please make sure to introduce your proposal within time.
If you need some (virtual) signatures of supporters just ask on the list :-)

Gunther




More information about the NANOG mailing list