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

[Geoff Huston <gih at apnic.net>]

> 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.

According to draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt, the wire format uses 
straightforward 32 bit fields to encode an AS number in "new" BGP.

The notation is in the form of offering guidance to folk relating to 
CLI, Route Registry Objects, Whois Objects, routing requests, ... and 
other places where humans and AS numbers intersect. I'm sure that 
most implementations of such tools would align to the principle of 
being liberal in what they accepts as input, but the notation is 
intended to offer some guidance to implementors and users of a 
default input format and a default output format.

regards,

Geoff





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