[89667] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Bad bgp identifier"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Mar 31 06:16:14 2006
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 03:15:39 -0800
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
To: Joe Maimon <jmaimon@ttec.com>, nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <442CFF3E.1040103@ttec.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
--==========AC3516F3970885114C59==========
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Unicast currently ends at 223.255.255.255.
224.0.0.0/4 is multicast and I believe that
240.0.0.0/5
248.0.0.0/6
252.0.0.0/6 are listed as reserved for experimental purposes.
Owen
--On March 31, 2006 5:06:54 AM -0500 Joe Maimon <jmaimon@ttec.com> wrote:
>
> 4271 specifies that bgp identifier must be a valid unicast ip address
>
> So what is the larget 32 bit value expressed as a dotted quad that meets
> this requirement?
>
> Is it the last address in class c? class e? Can 255.x.x.x be used?
>
> Do all vendors implement this?
>
> I understand that draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-06.txt does away with
> the above requirements. Is this something I should ask vendors if they
> will support it?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe
--=20
If this message was not signed with gpg key 0FE2AA3D, it's probably
a forgery.
--==========AC3516F3970885114C59==========
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFELQ9cn5zKWQ/iqj0RArXDAKCNxLoGEG//ANX7m39rUxAROhs2twCgk6az
Sh9olLRxwfXgJ8ZI9xN0vvk=
=LF3D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==========AC3516F3970885114C59==========--
