IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Idr] XXCs

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Wed, 08 April 2020 14:41 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBD573A0DB1 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 07:41:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cTXm0Fn3se-I for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 07:41:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x235.google.com (mail-oi1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DFD53A0C94 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 07:41:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x235.google.com with SMTP id q204so114783oia.13 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 07:41:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UUw8Vqww9hVqyl/+RYvtotF8EgiPdziEe1wOsMzUSgg=; b=BUJke7L0QR5x/gjFj96UJlr5tFdWVyrp7SpHiuSaaGBFThhsBp8dYYBfKs6dgrPORs nsbLgoD23/E7+38dvPeyKQGfzJ1Lh0GtLEqBTkzF89Wz/wYLvJqtO2oUSodwpRv9/y0C lcng0DchTs5vkrFF1LWr6N0BVlGaeSHmVjgsYlRAm2hQVUnuyQ4KrVMYewU/z/SoCgaI dKcyp7CRsntAbfwJDfaLdHuqXxs5m+upN752fNYebDCcxxX6Y9Rhkp5W6JYtN/HZs300 Mwbocgg3DPiKhVwpoUpHFbdaV3PtWLxfcZyXlFpbYRuek+HU1zcuTh5/hv7fLxF0iP8u M4xA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UUw8Vqww9hVqyl/+RYvtotF8EgiPdziEe1wOsMzUSgg=; b=jL/2eN+k0d4nLnPRa331JpYKa4JnfWyMGNxjRNhsrKOWjii5fz+4Z/5A7fVK13HUFr qAGKnbYlsMScXyPC/+5BnB53D10JJ1mz/SH4SN8jCQXtzj+F3ZsxNaja67rOIPI/1KWf +Gg5rusEFe7qYXUufmKZb85msJ+YXSSM+sy1u44SAxgr51wnK8FfPK9XF+CAwYw/SDEm dVDBmsI67QxzhVA9NT60rqL5J6iKNFefZuKkjj3w0o6ZOAJEpPCLxGIwPED0Y0Q/EWJd ov+A4wdCDeObEUt2w7r/phfTkK0ZNT0Grv6+se429fku3dE2ghAF17BWml1YfkcMToSI m3bA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZMM+s3xayqs9CMFi0Dw1wei24s/vUQ4x5TXobw0mrN+PbEoppx Lrq6phuAHNN5zOBgYFiibGNIFJJ3xFIi0rTdNtqZ3w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIyGyPM9e/YbB5uNCsmNaCzU9Z7PYtw75jjMM0k5kQjZATt+14Eem/x04N4BBzdZRBhHve3Mot5mFXvWtzotOY=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:5041:: with SMTP id e62mr2582692oib.146.1586356883990; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 07:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 16:41:12 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMEhJtfa+CjVgMT-eV=LbwTPxcmkT2zstFQB-GygHDWpug@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
Cc: "idr@ietf. org" <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008ebc8005a2c87eab"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/-f_9AcioCg5EDNCdPqaQ2MuUZTA>
Subject: [Idr] XXCs
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 14:41:56 -0000

Hey Jakob,

So just an idea - if we are to redefine transitivity for XXC why don't we
forget about all of this ASN reservations and simply instead of two
transitive bits define three.

Make 3rd bit to mean transitive only under set of ASes under same
administrative control ?

You still need a knob to know which ASNs are to be treated as same
administration. And with that no change to community syntax  is needed at
all - LOCAL_ASN:NUMBER

Done !

Thx,
R.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email