Re: [Idr] Re: Last Call: 'Canonical representation of 4-byte AS numbers' to Informational RFC (draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation)

[Joe Abley <jabley at ca.afilias.info>]

On 10-Oct-2006, at 08:05, Scott Leibrand wrote:

> On 10/09/06 at 11:09pm -0500, Joe Abley <jabley at ca.afilias.info>  
> wrote:
>
> > But then how do you distinguish between a 2-byte only AS number and a
> > 4-byte AS number which happens to be less than 0.65535?
>
> There is no meaningful distinction, is there?

In terms of resource allocation, it seems to me that you only have to  
deal with 32-bit numbers, and no distinction is necessary.

In terms of presentation to an operator, e.g. as part of a "show"  
command, it also seems like whatever is simplest and easier on the  
eye wins.

(I would note that on cisco routers it's perfectly possible to view  
community string attributes as simple 32-bit numbers, but everybody  
seems to prefer the representation of two 16-bit values separated by  
a colon.)

In terms of encoding values into a wire format to include in a BGP  
attribute, though, might it not be important for the router to know  
which was intended? Perhaps not; I'm not a router vendor, and I'm not  
presupposing an answer.


Joe


_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr