[146625] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: economic value of low AS numbers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Hart)
Thu Nov 17 12:24:27 2011
In-Reply-To: <20111117152244.GA58484@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
From: Dave Hart <davehart@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:22:44 +0000
To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: davehart_gmail_exchange_tee@davehart.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 15:22, Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org> wrote:
> In a message written on Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 02:53:26PM +0000, Dave Hart =
wrote:
>> I recognize there's no practical shortage of AS numbers. =A0BGP's
>> preference for low AS numbers doesn't come into play much. =A0On the
>> other hand, a low AS number can't hurt at the human level when
>> negotiating peering or attracting customers.
>
> I think you are confusing a "low ASN" with a "low router ID", or
> maybe "low neighbor IP address".
>
> For a refresher, see:
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094=
431.shtml
>
> A low ASN has no technical value, as far as I know.
I am exposed! I have never connected to a router that wasn't a
looking glass. I am not worthy... I did try to hide that fact by
doing a little research. I was fooled by:
"Prefer the route learned from the BGP speaker with the numerically
lowest BGP identifier"
and (mis)interpreted BGP identifier as ASN.
> =A0Socially perhaps
> some folks give additional respect/envy to those with low ASN's.
> There's an old joke in the peering community, ASN < 3 digits, peer
> with them. =A0ASN with 4 digits, think about peering with them. =A0ASN
> with 5 digits, forget it. =A0However, I do believe it's just a joke,
> I'm sure more folks peer with Akamai (20940) than with NASA (24).
That's both funny and helpful, thanks.
Dave Hart
