Re: ASN draft

[Bill Manning <[e-mail]>]

> 	(b) makes it more difficult to determine when and where it's safe
> 		to aggregate in general
> 	(b) increases the dirversity of AS paths for no good reason
> 		(which chews up memory)

Uh, (c) right...

> 
> I think the biggest disagreement we have is the idea of wrapping ones mind
> around the idea of using ASNs _in_the_context_of_BGP_.  Perhaps we should
> be calling the darn things something other than ASNs,  because several
> autonomous systems should be encouraged to share a single ASN (their
> providers) if there isn't a routing decision that should be made based upon
> that ASN.

Humm,  perhaps what we -really- need is an addenda to RFC 1597 to block
out some ASN for routing use?  :)  

> the concept of doling out ASNs to people who don't need them for routing
> decsisions scares the living s--- out of me.

Not me. I bask in the glow of my vast wealth of cisco futures.
(I really need the money to play in the stock market... :)

> Why does my IGRP, EIGRP, or OSPF identifer (what we used to call the ASN)
> have to have anything to do with a NIC assigned AS?  All I need to do is

Nada.  Thats one good reason to not co-opt the NIC ASN (as an AS tag) for
use in routing... except that it is the "right" way to ident AS'es in 
routing registries.  Too bad that it is also used by BGP for routing.

>> The whole concept of an AS under common administrative bounds has nothing t
>> do with the way BGP uses ASs _today_.  I think we can all agree on that
>> statement, so let's get to the more conceptual question:
>   
>   I'll have to agree here.
> 
> Whew. :-)
> 

Lets quit now while we agree. :)

>> Is there any reason to maintain the idea of an AS as a collection of prefix
>> under common administration and sharing the same security/trust policies?
>> 
>> If you can show just cause, then I'm willing to agree with you, at which
>> point, I will wet my panties because we're going to run out of AS space nex

Did my reason work?  Is it time to change?
(The "its the way things are tagged in the route registry to define AS bounds"
 argument that really have nothing to do w/ BGP per say and everything to do
 with who has the "right" to be the "home-AS" for any given prefix/mask pair)


-- 
--bill