[165844] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 32-bit ASN acceptance by ISPs in ARIN region
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Geoff Huston)
Mon Sep 23 10:14:38 2013
From: Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130923140204.GJ339@Elise.local>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 00:14:21 +1000
To: Job Snijders <job.snijders@atrato.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 24/09/2013, at 12:02 AM, Job Snijders <job.snijders@atrato.com> =
wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:28:58PM +1000, Geoff Huston wrote:
>=20
>> On 23/09/2013, at 8:01 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
>>=20
>>> I look forward to the day when we have proper 32 bit BGP community
>>> support and ASN32s finally become usable on nontrivial networks.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> Is there some reference that describes the problems with the use of
>> RFC5668? I was not aware that there were residual issues here.
>=20
> It would've been really nice if one could fit more than 16 bit in the
> locally administrated part.=20
>=20
> Kind regards,
>=20
> Job
I'm sorry, but I'm still confused, as I see your comment as one that =
relates to the
size of the payload field here, as distinct from the support for 32 bit =
AS numbers
per se.
Geoff
