Route Server Filters at IXPs and 4-byte ASNs

Jeffrey Haas jhaas at pfrc.org
Wed Feb 5 13:52:03 UTC 2014


Martin,

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 10:06:31AM +0100, Martin Pels wrote:
> > Wide communities is the wrong tool here. You want this:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype-06
> 
> This draft does not cater for the use case of describing a 32-bit ASN peering
> with a 32-bit route server, which would require a 4-byte Global Administrator
> as well as a 4-byte Local Administrator sub-field.

I think that's the first clear articulation I've read about why some people
want wide comms vs. a simple replacement for existing regular communities as
extended communities.  Thanks.

Wide comms can do that, but they're intended to be a somewhat bigger hammer.

This case is probably worth chatting with the authors and others in IDR at
IETF to see if we should do something simpler.

-- Jeff



More information about the NANOG mailing list