Re: [Idr] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11.txt

David Freedman <> Sat, 03 December 2016 10:53 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88CE31296A7 for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 02:53:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.903
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qKTHyraPsTK0 for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 02:53:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ACDB1296A4 for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 02:53:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] by id FC/B6-09407-814A2485; Sat, 03 Dec 2016 10:53:12 +0000
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrJIsWRWlGSWpSXmKPExsUSsELzq67EEqc Ig5fTmS1e3X7G5MDosWTJT6YAxijWzLyk/IoE1ozm5VNYC45yV7x5M4G5gXEuZxcjF4eQwEEm ifMr37B1MXICOWsYJVouWoPYbAJGEhPW7WfpYuTgEBFQlFj5KRkkLCwQJnH4xhJmEFtEIFxi1 oXNTBC2kcTes6/B4iwCKhKfdt8As3kF7CU+bZ3NBDHeXmL1vh9gNqeAg8SD190sIDajgKzEl8 bVYPXMAuISTV9WsoLYEgICEkv2nGeGsEUlXj7+xwpRoyOxYPcnNghbW2LZwtdQuwQlTs58wjK BUWgWklGzkLTMQtIyC0nLAkaWVYwaxalFZalFuoaWeklFmekZJbmJmTm6hgamermpxcWJ6ak5 iUnFesn5uZsYgUFez8DAuIPxUb/fIUZJDiYlUd6qLKcIIb6k/JTKjMTijPii0pzU4kOMMhwcS hK83IuBcoJFqempFWmZOcB4g0lLcPAoifDyg6R5iwsSc4sz0yFSpxgVpcR5dy0CSgiAJDJK8+ DaYDF+iVFWSpiXkYGBQYinILUoN7MEVf4VozgHo5Iw70SQKTyZeSVw018BLWYCWtxx3R5kcUk iQkqqgdFIyU5yX8pC9QuFyiIXj951Vyvl+WrOZJm1R3DJyRVaf7ZZdWmrSHo0XBBUKTzrW/nA qlKfuaYxRHor60L9J9Ot6/9nMrLafvmW+FdVaU1+xobWv3edpPzq/8pemKT/t4U/OmXCw0oHp hSjwMXVO6QnPDc4Pe+lnntD9ONAh79e1/4LcRyyUWIpzkg01GIuKk4EAKdlSGvsAgAA
X-Originating-IP: []
X-StarScan-Version: 9.0.16; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 3339 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2016 10:53:12 -0000
Received: from (HELO ( by with SMTP; 3 Dec 2016 10:53:12 -0000
Received: from [] (port=41609 helo=SRVGREXCAS02.claranet.local) by ( []:25) with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) id 1cD7wN-0006nt-Cf for (return-path <>); Sat, 03 Dec 2016 10:53:11 +0000
Received: from SRVGREXMB01.claranet.local ([fe80::64bc:5d10:5203:a830]) by SRVGREXCAS02.claranet.local ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 10:47:45 +0000
From: David Freedman <>
To: "" <>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11.txt
Thread-Index: AdJNTgXIg6oTqyNoQkmKlN+gSmWq4AABKgA3
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2016 10:47:44 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-idr-large-community-11.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2016 10:53:15 -0000

just had an offlist conversation with job, and he has recommended that I elaborate on this point as it may be non obvious to some.

The GA is intended to be an ASN, but IMHO AS_TRANS is not an ASN, it is a signal between peers in an OPEN exchange and a signal between hops that information is missing in some way, it is not an ASN in the sense that it should (or perhaps now even *could*) be used by anybody as a local ASN for a router.

As such I'm aware of code that exists which discriminates against AS_TRANS, there are various libraries which handle data structures like ASNs (which could be used in , say , creating or validating a GA field) which would be very unhappy if fed AS_TRANS as their initial input.

I understand we want to progress the draft , and that and a line has to be drawn between what could be unwise in implementations , vs what could be unwise to be seen on the internet , and that a registry can exist for the latter , but this is something I feel strongly should live on the former side , and if a list of values is going to be specified in the draft , I feel this should be in it (irony aside).


> On 3 Dec 2016, at 10:14, David Freedman <> wrote:
> last minute nit: if we are going to recommend that particular reserved ASNs are avoided for the global administrator, can we please include AS_TRANS (RFC6793), there is probably a certain irony in not doing so.
> Dave