Re: [Idr] Call for adoption of draft-mitchell-idr-private-as-reservation-01 as IDR WG document

[David Farmer <[e-mail]>]

On 8/27/12 22:00 CDT, Randy Bush wrote:
>> I'm sorry but it is not a convoluted use case, section 3.1 of RFC 2270
>> details the exact case, if the customer wants a full route table.
>
> yes, that's a bit old.  no problem giving a full table to 942 peers who
> all use the same asn.  2270 was written before the "ignore my as in
> path" hacks by all vendors.
>
>> I recommend the customer gets an RIR assigned globally unique ASN, but
>> some customers don't want to do that.
>
> no problem.  use 2270+ignore-my-asn-hack
>
> this all works.  this is all widely used.  we do not need more
> cleverness.  we do not need to end-run the rirs (we need to abolish
> them, but that's a whole other discussion in another venue)

That is just as much of a hack or convoluted way of doing things as you 
claim that using a unique private ASN per customer is a hack or 
convoluted.

Yes, 2270+ignore-my-asn-hack is one way to do things, but using unique 
private ASNs per customer is another reasonable way to do things too. 
They are both more-or-less equal on the hack-o-meeter from my perspective.

I've used both, I generally prefer unique private ASN per customer, but 
YMMV.

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:[e-mail]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota	
2218 University Ave SE	    Phone: [phone]
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================