Re: [Idr] WGLC on draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-00

Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> Thu, 29 November 2012 18:57 UTC

Return-Path: <tony.li@tony.li>
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 A00CE21F8B66 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:57:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ieWrMzVP6ETY for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:57:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe2d:43:76:96:30:24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E5E021F8B67 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:57:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.27]) by qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id VWLg1k0010b6N64A2WxpSi; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:57:49 +0000
Received: from [10.155.35.198] ([128.107.239.234]) by omta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id VWvd1k003547xYo8PWvftS; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:55:47 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
From: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <CEEF8969-16D0-42B9-A093-F058E5D1848F@apnic.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:55:36 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <574CC47E-4BF6-4749-8B44-CFA526ECDFD6@tony.li>
References: <B6B72499-E9D0-4281-84EB-6CA53694866E@juniper.net> <2CDB688B-9C24-4AF5-8900-20A88211AC54@apnic.net> <1AF020BC-65F1-4484-AAAD-355A294A7692@kumari.net> <CEEF8969-16D0-42B9-A093-F058E5D1848F@apnic.net>
To: Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1354215469; bh=xONr1n+O8GG48/ql5c/A15y6kzqNtAcSMxspqKNuwOk=; h=Received:Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date: Message-Id:To; b=XYnBvsI2DNeNkFAs2Jv6HxnU1/D36PpdzSEdTRYssW+thAb3kF8THbpeuaU89bt1+ 7W+981JhqLC8PcHZs9T1nkjm6xIThCwBVRKNo6rowRbF2FUeGxdKBlZYKvxrzPtfyr suamnLjGgpi4swy4MsE3YKu403iAFDtoTN9tWjHuc+QQeUyP+1RGts6HoncoZ2sdNc rWZnWapaFEzBXTQHSfWc+cgr4MvS9PxmVnKos3GJUT7mITMb6M93nY9dipuNbW/IgF iwh6oIc0BZe2Ip1tKNs3FGXRLthT10JGpSDwCkoSDB3xWIPCidL+QnP1fqZ3afrt58 QlZ21+yY57jmg==
Cc: "idr@ietf. org" <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WGLC on draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-00
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:57:49 -0000

On Nov 29, 2012, at 10:21 AM, Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net> wrote:

> But if there is a single need for 100,000 code points in single coherent space then you have to ask how one could ensure uniqueness within the deployment space, as you are now talking about a large number of entities and a large coder point space, and according to your response, the reason why there is a driving need  duplicate an existing uniqueness framework is because the current framework we have for ensuring uniqueness of AS number code points is ... "inelegant"?


Obviously, the private use ASNs would have local uniqueness and specified by the local administration.  Not a big deal.  More to the point, the noise and fluff of administering this is not something that you want foisted on the RIRs, especially when multiplied by the number of sites using it.

We've seen over and over again that the right way of creating scalability is to create hierarchy.  All this is doing is to continue its instantiation.

Tony