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

David Farmer <> Sat, 03 December 2016 13:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E79AA129664 for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 05:31:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.696
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.696 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1fUtswJXQA9C for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 05:31:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 602DD1297BF for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 05:31:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D527B9FE for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 13:31:09 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sTtefppWp6Um for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 07:31:09 -0600 (CST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9ED1161A for <>; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 07:31:09 -0600 (CST)
Received: by with SMTP id x26so190508817qtb.6 for <>; Sat, 03 Dec 2016 05:31:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Q0qYCHCYz/1lYA9FuKWY1jp5EVoc7Tk0oTmEM8j8aaU=; b=V/vCezuUYmJitMwnRdnsBemwEhfmkOxI8vOXCNcMXrWQ2U9KgskSwGAUSVH9DqDU4Z D4wJuvPusjQ28on7ozbLG4SyY4nJ2LWohYb9zWRB9bCItji4qhI1yMGv6K7BpAAfE3e9 vi7og0VgHBaOvd/n1u10F6GZDf2DbHq1+/SHoQq5hpgWouRTkYqaUB2B5lC0pUndy4eS gvDY5epRRneF1KC/vomwTD/V318J7tDm/esPUA1i+5FBddBOdW5SPBzahw/5CRf9lxlP xAFR3OnvXKDBQOWd+XB7BLGURad0M5j2KJYw+pVfd1RHIR/qqEoZ9OPXLgX1rjRRXe6L 1EPQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Q0qYCHCYz/1lYA9FuKWY1jp5EVoc7Tk0oTmEM8j8aaU=; b=gHCcO4zeR7+QOGeRq27y1KrMZhVljndJS8qA5FRgIpOTaEI0FWZQsHv2nC2ld7bWqg s/A/GaKQmx6TXZhT4rnsOjfPVu4Vct2cduojdoOS2uZlmFuQhEw36IPmItIZKTkhyCfe jc8tmsGQYr6apkPgTTMutW1Fs2rESeTJpmlY+j0Hjqme5Y3bxmtyMyqb2plIkZINHESA lmviEAIopNxrVVxXA09Dsajv2nRPsaRJOXTfPVqa18a9WYXtEX4XW5jgBPHYNmFaJPRe Ylg7SmfhHhmuTNQHH7hY93M2rnr34mQfE4uvZOUmyCv0KZiYsZRVfYyDzYKwM6PqJONB RTBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC01GDnbEBU3l+PXzaLNY9VaLWTaG2Z8jk4xh8MKH9neSTu3Z6/KSzM5zbOcjKSEUoLUTHV8lSjGkXAks3NMi7bVECVXUksricUIvXpd8xJOxTPfq1T2f6fhvv/QXoSXKfe+5tnpUyy7qvA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id z144mr41202137qka.194.1480771868982; Sat, 03 Dec 2016 05:31:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by with SMTP id z144mr41202126qka.194.1480771868786; Sat, 03 Dec 2016 05:31:08 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Sat, 3 Dec 2016 05:31:08 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
From: David Farmer <>
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2016 07:31:08 -0600
Message-ID: <>
To: David Freedman <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114a88683b996b0542c111ff"
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
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 13:31:13 -0000

I read the new language as a general recommendation, with emphasis on the
three specific examples, and not necessary limited the the three listed
examples, therefore the recommendation already applies to AS_TRANS

  The use of Reserved ASNs (0 [RFC7607], 65535 and 4294967295 [RFC7300]) is

If the intent is to be generic, as I am interpreting it, then maybe this
could be clarified a bit by adding a reference to the IANA Special-Purpose
ASN Registry with a minor tweak of the language.

   ...([IANA.SpecialAS], and particularly 0 [RFC7607], 65535 and 4294967295

             IANA, "Special-Purpose Autonomous System (AS) Numbers",

Otherwise, if it is intended to apply to only the specified ASNs then maybe
that should be clarified and AS_TRANS [RFC6793] added.

  The use of the following Reserved ASNs is NOT RECOMMENDED, 0 [RFC7607],
23456 [RFC6793], 65535 and 4294967295 [RFC7300].

I prefer the recommendation be generic, with emphasis on 0, 65535, and
4294967295, but not limited to those three.  That way the recommendation
applies to new ASNs added to the IANA Special-Purpose ASN Registry without
have to update this specification each time a new Reserved ASN is added.


On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 4:47 AM, David Freedman <>

> 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).
> Dave
> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list

David Farmer     
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952