Re: ASN draft

[[e-mail]]

> 
> 
> | Then one has to ask why BGP keeps mutating... :) Yakov?
> 
> No, not Yakov.  Sprintlink and ICM are really nasty
> environments filled with natural selection pressures.
> This encourages the Darwinization of BGP4.
> 
> Other natural selection pressures exist in the land of MCI,
> Alternet, ANS and elsewhere.

So when are you releasing the BGP5s draft?
And should I also expect to see the BGP5m, BGP5a etc drafts?
This is sounding like propritary protocols to me.


> 
> | > Some organizations have lots of ASes.  Some organizations
> | > have no AS.
> | 
> | Yup. So why are we trying to indicate that an ASN is used strictly for
> | routing policy?
> 
> Because organizations and autonomous systems are not the same.
> Administrative policy and routing policy are not the same.
> 
> Organizations and ASes may once used to have been the same
> (that's debatable), but they simply aren't now.  Insisting
> that there's a one-to-one correlation between organizations
> and ASes is fantasy.

There seems to be a disconnect here.  Adminstrative / Organizational
are two different things as you have stated elsewhere in this thread.
I agree that a one-to-one corelation between organization & AS is 
a rare creature.  I will continue to preach that there is a one-to-one
corelation between an administrative domain and an AS.  

> Sorry, but the real world no longer conforms to what you
> consider the original model of ASes or ASNs.  
.
> (The RADB sould reflect reality)

I have seen no proof that it does not conform to my view of what an
AS is.  What I see is an attempt to turn a screw into a nail. (as in
when all you have is a hammer)

The RADB reflects the policies of those registering... as long as
it is expressible in RIPE-181 syntax.  Since there are some problems
doing that, there may be proposed changes to RIPE-181 in the future 
so that more complex policies can be registered.  This portion of the
thread is tangental to AS creation and ASN assignment.

--bill