[ppml] Proposed Policy: 4-Byte AS Number Policy Proposal

[Geoff Huston]

At 09:33 PM 13/12/2005, Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote:
> > Your point about syntactical confusion with AS number communities is
>well
> > taken.
> >
> > What about a dot as the nibble separator within the AS number then?
>
>Is there something wrong with using 78934526:1234 to refer to
>community 1234 in AS number 78934526?

This notation is not formally part of the policy proposal - it is a
convenience in the same way that the dotted quad notation for
IPv4 addresses is a convenience. Use it or not as you want.


>Is it worthwhile specifying that AS numbers should be allocated
>sequentially rather than randomly from the 4 byte numberspace?


I see no reason to head off there The policy does not proposes such changes
to the manner of AS number allocation.  This is a _temporary_ policy
intended to provide some milestones in the transition to  a larger AS Number
space that will allow vendors, operators and others to prepare their part 
of the
plot well before we exhaust the 2 byte number pool.

>--Michael Dillon
>
>P.S. Would anyone have objections to rewriting that policy
>in plain English?


If "that policy" refers to "4-Byte AS Number Policy Proposal" then
yes, I do have objections.