that 4byte ASN you were considering...

william(at) william at
Tue Oct 10 18:28:30 UTC 2006

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Kevin Loch wrote:

> Randy Bush wrote:
>>> - 'Canonical representation of 4-byte AS numbers '
>>>    <draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation-01.txt> as an Informational 
>>> RFC
>> and what is good or bad about this representation?  seems simple to me. 
>> and having one notation seems reasonable.  what am i missing?
> Using '.' as a delimiter will be somewhat annoying when used in
> regular expressions and likely to induce errors.  Would '-' be a
> better choice?

No. We already use "." for number of ip resources so this is good.
I suspect new tools & config systems will also accept full 32bit
number as well (just like its sometimes possible with ip addresses)
which will give you way out if you do not like "." in ASN. And
regular ASNs < 65k will work without "0." in this way as well.

William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william at

More information about the NANOG mailing list