Re: Route Server Filters at IXPs and 4-byte ASNs

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

On Feb 5, 2014, at 8:52 AM, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas () pfrc org> wrote:

> > This draft does not cater for the use case of describing a 32-bit ASN peering
> > with a 32-bit route server, which would require a 4-byte Global Administrator
> > as well as a 4-byte Local Administrator sub-field.
>
> I think that's the first clear articulation I've read about why some people
> want wide comms vs. a simple replacement for existing regular communities as
> extended communities.  Thanks.

I suspect the operator confusion is that’s how they’ve been using 16-bit ASNs
all along, so how did the IETF end up with something different.

http://www.onesc.net/communities/ is a fairly comprehensive list of how they are used today.

- jared