Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

mc mc at ukeer.de
Wed Nov 17 10:50:08 CST 2010


Hi,

(forgot list)

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:40:14 +0100, Fredy Kuenzler <kuenzler at init7.net>
wrote:
> Am 17.11.2010 10:19, schrieb Fredy Kuenzler:
>>
>> 4739 45158 {64512 64514 64516 64519 64521 64522 64525 64526 64528 64529
>> 64530 64535 64537 64538 64541 64542 64543 64544 64545 64546 64547 64548
>> 64549 64552 64553 64556 64557 64560 64561 64562 64564 64565 64566 64568
>> 64569 64570 64574 64575 64576 64577 64578 64580 64582 64583 64584 64588
>> 64593 64598 64599 64601 64602 64605 64610 64611 64620 64621 65397 65398
>> 65470 65471 65472 65473 65474 65479 65480 65484 65485 65490 65502 65505
>> 65511 65514 65523 65524 65528 65534 65609} ?
> 
> The propagation itself of the originator is rather uncommon, I'd say,
> as we can see, it's a BGP confederation of not less than 77 private AS
> numbers. Don't know for what it should be useful...

one minor correction here: 65609 is no private ASN, its a reserved one
in ASN32 Space (65609 > 65535, which is 2^16-1).

looking at my junipers sh rou ... detail, it showed me the AS_SET with
AS_TRANS in ASN16_PATH, and AS65609 in ASN32_PATH and ASN-MERGED_PATH. 
What surprised me a bit was that AS_TRANS was at the beginning of the
AS_SET, while 65609 was listed at the end of the AS_SET; which may or
may be an issue of presentation only, or may or maybe a problem.

In the end it wouldnt surprise me if one or another implementation
would screw up exactly because of ASN32 here.



my 2c,
 -mc




More information about the NANOG mailing list