Re: [Idr] new revision of private use ASN reservation draft

[Randy Bush <[e-mail]>]

>> "If private use ASNs are used between cooperating operators, special
>> attention should be given to ensuring uniqueness of the private use
>> ASNs between the operators. The use of the newer, numerically higher
>> range of private use ASNs is recommended for such cooperative use
>> between multiple operators, its significantly larger size allows the
>> coordination of large ranges for each cooperating operator,
>> simplifying "
> 
> Although in many cases, we know that these situations are a reality,
> I'm a bit concerned about the language here as it might encourage such
> use or mis-use of private ASN's that both Chris and Randy were
> concerned with, and boundary (public) ASN's or other approaches maybe
> better approaches to solve this problem depending on the specific use
> case.  Secondly, the above seems to imply that using the newer range
> is preferred, when in reality many other approaches as long as they
> were coordinated would work (one use older range, one use newer range,
> centralized database/registry, etc...).

let's be honest here.  what is being said is that this is really a new
public space with ad hoc assignment and recording.  we already have a
centralized database, we should use it.

randy