Re: [v6ops] [Idr] BGP Identifier

"Fan, Peng" <> Mon, 17 February 2014 10:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 639D71A03C3; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 02:10:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.225
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.225 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RELAY_IS_221=2.222, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8CBR8jAa_Ir1; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 02:10:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with SMTP id BF80B1A03AE; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 02:10:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown[]) by rmmx-oa_allagent01-12001 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee15301df8a7cc-e37cc; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:08:10 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee15301df8a7cc-e37cc
Received: from X6X8D79D8F49E2 (unknown[]) by rmsmtp-oa_rmapp03-12003 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee35301df89908-c9e11; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:08:10 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee35301df89908-c9e11
From: "Fan, Peng" <>
To: "'Robert Raszuk'" <>
References: <> <> <006801cf2b34$22837cd0$678a7670$> <> <009e01cf2b8b$26a43d20$73ecb760$> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:10:57 +0800
Message-ID: <002401cf2bc8$8d1a7a50$a74f6ef0$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0025_01CF2C0B.9B400440"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQKMyHwF2uN/MFx2cQfT+KJLjKc69QG64jb+AobGL2AB8SVRaAGHMZlXAkZuM4GY7fbMQA==
Content-Language: zh-cn
Cc: 'idr wg' <>, 'V6 Ops List' <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [Idr] BGP Identifier
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 10:10:32 -0000

Hi Robert,


Yes that is a possible solution for troubleshooting, once the router_id has
been determined. But how do you determine at first the value of a.b.c.d when
there is no ipv4 address to be referred to, especially in an automatic
manner? Beforehand planning work for the ids for the entire network is
something I am concerned with :)





From: [] On Behalf Of Robert
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 5:25 PM
To: Fan, Peng
Cc: Randy Bush; idr wg; V6 Ops List
Subject: Re: [Idr] [v6ops] BGP Identifier


Hi Peng,


Can't you just use ::a.b.c.d/96 for ping and troubleshooting 4 octet
router_id in IPv6 only network? 


No protocol changes needed :)




On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Fan, Peng <> wrote:

Hi Randy,

Just to clarify. I am not complaining we cannot assign the unique integers,
but the integers require additional planning, and that from operational
perspective causes inconvenience. Following the experience in ipv4 enabled
network would be a natural thought, especially when you want the IDs to be
helpful in troubleshooting rather than just pure numbers.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Bush []
> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 9:45 AM
> To: Peng Fan
> Cc: idr wg; V6 Ops List
> Subject: Re: [Idr] [v6ops] BGP Identifier

> > Thanks for the discussion and sorry for the late. Assigning an id is
> > not a difficult issue, especially on a single router. But what number
> > is to be assigned might be an issue, especially in an ISP's large
> > network, in order to guarantee the uniqueness of the ids.
> as i said, if you can not assign unique 32 bit integers to your routers,
you have far
> bigger problems in your organization and network.  and having them be 128
> integers is not going to solve your problems.
> randy

Idr mailing list