[ppml] 2006-7 IPV6 Initial Allocation suggested changes- InputRequested
marla.azinger at frontiercorp.com
Tue Nov 14 13:01:27 EST 2006
Thank you Geoff. Good points!
From: Geoff Huston [mailto:gih at apnic.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:31 AM
To: Azinger, Marla; ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [ppml] 2006-7 IPV6 Initial Allocation suggested changes-
But just because these numbers don't show up in your routing table
does not mean that they don't show up in all routing tables. If I
were to peer locally with another ISP here in Australia, then its not
likely that this additional peering would appear in any routing table
outside of this particular continent. So, from your perspective it
would appear that my AS number is singly homed and it looks like
"bloat" or "waste" to you, while to me it is necessary to undertake
my chosen form of interconnection. So my AS, if it appears to you as
a single homed AS, is in fact a "single transit homed" AS from your
perspective, but that says nothing about any richer form of local
interconnection that is not directly related to transit services.
* end of substantive comment - ramblings follow - hit delete now!
** and if you read it anyway and want to post a followup then please
keep the followup off the ppml mailing list, as its not really
relevant to that list - just send to me directly!
Wandering further into this area of the role of ASNs for routing ,
just for a second, the semantics of an ASN has changed over time - As
I understand it, the original model of some decades ago equated an AS
to both an interior routing domain and the coupling of this domain to
an origination of a collection of prefixes that shared the same routing policy.
Over the years the "shared the same routing policy" has disappeared,
and now the prefix is the element of routing policy, while the AS is,
in effect, the labelling of an interior routing domain.
If we ever want to use these tokens for more than what they are today
(today, strictly speaking, ASNs form the BGP path metric of last
resort and the protocol's loop detector, and their use in the area of
routing policy expression is an adornment of the original semantic
intent rather than a core feature) and, specifically if we want to
use ASNs as forwarding tokens, then, yes the ASN distribution
policies would need to accommodate the aspect of one routing domain
wanting to express multiple external routing policies using, in such
a case, multiple AS numbers. (was that really one sentence? I think
less coffee is called for! :-))
Its not bloat, nor is it waste. Its just numbers with meanings!
At 03:30 AM 15/11/2006, Azinger, Marla wrote:
>Bloat may be a bad word to use. How about 'waste'?
More information about the ARIN-PPML