Re: [Idr] WG adoption of draft-heitz-idr-large-community; one week to comment on early code point allocation

[Job Snijders <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:49:41PM -0700, Brian Dickson wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Job Snijders <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > 3) Should values in the range "65535:0:0 - 65535:4294967295:4294967295" be
> >    reserved to accomodate any future well known communities? 65535 is
> >    used in RFC1997 so i see merit in continuing to use that number.
> 
> IMHO, the first of the 3 32-bit values, should be treated as per the
> IANA registry for Autonomous System Numbers.

In most of the cases, probably.

> There are several values in both 16-bit and 32-bit ranges with special
> purposes. Those include documentation purposes, private use, and
> "reserved".  Currently, I see the relevant values in the table as
> follows:
> 
> 0 (Reserved, RFC7607)
> 23456 (AS_TRANS, RFC6794)
> 64496-64511 (Documentation and sample code, RFC5398)
> 64512-65534 (Private use, RFC6996)
> 65535 (Reserved, RFC7300)
> 65536-65551 (Doc'n & sample code, RFC5398)
> 65552-131071 (Reserved)
> 4200000000-4294967294 (Private use, RFC6996)
> 4294967295 (Reserved, RFC7300)
> 
> I'm not sure what the preferred method is these days, either refer to
> the ARIN table, or to the RFCs directly.  However, the corresponding
> communities should inherit the properties (Reserved, Documentation and
> Sample Code, Private Use, and AS_TRANS).

I agree with you that these are special values, but they are a different
kind of special than the '65535' from RFC 1997.

I don't see how these values have meaning in a BGP implementation, thus
are probably out of scope for IDR. I think this will be better covered
in the "Usage" document we'll submit to GROW in the short term.

Kind regards,

Job