Re: [Idr] [Fwd: I-D Action:draft-chen-rfc4893bis-01.txt]

[Paul Jakma <paul at jakma.org>]

On Wed, 4 Feb 2009, Rob Shakir wrote:

> One error handling approach after we have discarded this attribute 
> is stating in this RFC that any AS_TRANS that is observed in 
> AS_PATH is assumed to be our own AS, unless we are able to replace 
> it with data from AS4_PATH. As someone commented to me off-list, 
> loops are very destructive, and we should try to avoid them at 
> almost any cost -- if we assume AS_TRANS is us , then we don't 
> 'punish' prefixes that are propagated with invalid data to us, but 
> we do take measures to ensure that we are not causing a loop.

This was suggested already. However it seems there is no need for 
this as, on any cycle, there should be at least one OLD speaker that 
will see its own, non-AS_TRANS, ASN and stop the loop. (See, e.g., 
emails from John Scudder).

regards,
--
Paul Jakma	paul at clubi.ie	paul at jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Kilroe hic erat!