that 4byte ASN you were considering...

Henk Uijterwaal henk at
Tue Oct 10 11:56:09 UTC 2006

At 13:34 10/10/2006, Michael.Dillon at wrote:

>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 Uijterwaal                           Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)
RIPE Network Coordination Centre
P.O.Box 10096          Singel 258         Phone: +31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam      1016 AB Amsterdam  Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands        The Netherlands    Mobile: +31.6.55861746

1160438400 + 381600 = 1160820000.    

More information about the NANOG mailing list