nanog mailing list archives
Re: 4 Byte AS tested
From: Geoff Huston <gih () apnic net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:05:56 +1100
At 09:04 AM 12/01/2007, MAEMURA Akinori wrote:
Hi Randy, Yes. We can never have the knowledge of *all* BGP speakers in the world, then keeping a 4-byte ASN announced to let everyone observe it looks a good strategy to see what would be happening. The test you did has already proven that the current Internet routing system has no serious problem with 4-byte ASN. ( Did it have any? )
No, there were no problems with this particular exercise. What this test confirmed (for this path) is that opaque path attributes marked as optional and transitive do indeed pass through the deployed BGP fabric without alteration. This is a reassuring confirmation!
regards, Geoff
Current thread:
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested, (continued)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Arnold Nipper (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Antti Louko (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Joe Provo (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Todd Underwood (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Geoff Huston (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Geoff Huston (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested MAEMURA Akinori (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Randy Bush (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested MAEMURA Akinori (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Randy Bush (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Geoff Huston (Jan 11)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- RE: 4 Byte AS tested Geoff Huston (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Randy Bush (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested Arnold Nipper (Jan 11)
- Re: 4 Byte AS tested bmanning (Jan 11)