nanog mailing list archives

Re: Route Server Filters at IXPs and 4-byte ASNs


From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas () pfrc org>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:52:03 -0500

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


Current thread: