Re: autosys to a PS

[Peter Lothberg <[e-mail]>]

> Folks,
> 
> Following the agreement we reached at the last WG meeting, I'd like to
> ask the IESG to advance "Guidelines for creation, selection, and registration
> of an Autonomous System (AS)" Internet draft
> (draft-ietf-idr-autosys-guide-02.txt) to a Proposed Standard. If anyone
> still have strong objections to this, please send your comments within
> the next week (till March 9) to the mailing list.
> Yakov.

I have problems with this paper, as it is used by the registrys to
refuce people who have good technical reasons for using BGP to get an
AS-number.

It forces us back to design routing sytems that looks like the old EGP
model. (If you only allocate one AS, no_one could be multi-homed, so
you don't need more AS'es..)

We did spend enourmous amount of resources in order to get a stable
and powerfull (enough...) exterior routing protocol in BGP. But now 
we can't use this tool in order to build a scalable Internet, wich we
baadly need.

So now, when we can't use it, and are limited to using leakings IGP's or 
other kludges, what did we gain by this?

If running out of AS-numbers is a problem, how about make them 32
bits?


---Peter