Route Server Filters at IXPs and 4-byte ASNs

Jared Mauch jared at puck.nether.net
Wed Feb 5 14:02:52 UTC 2014


On Feb 5, 2014, at 8:52 AM, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas at pfrc.org> wrote:

>> 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.

I suspect the operator confusion is that’s how they’ve been using 16-bit ASNs
all along, so how did the IETF end up with something different.

http://www.onesc.net/communities/ is a fairly comprehensive list of how they are used today.

- jared


More information about the NANOG mailing list