North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: as numbers

  • From: Gaurab Raj Upadhaya
  • Date: Mon Aug 01 13:38:42 2005 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Anyone who uses the argument of inter-domain routing that are not seen by
any data collectors on the Internet should be pointed at RFC1930 and told
to renumber their private ASNs.

Just because public route collectors can't see use of an ASN, that doesn't mean the ASN isn't in use; just because it can't be seen doesn't mean it's private-use: it might still feature on routes announced on the Internet, even if the routes don't propagate globally.

For a trivial example of this, consider a multilat route server at an exchange point. Unless you measure from within (or downstream of) a peer of the route server, you'll never see the AS number in an AS_PATH attribute. It's fairly clear to me that this is not a suitable candidate for private-use numbering, however.

I can see that happening all over the place where external connectivity is pre-dominantly over satellite, or where there is a monopoly in transit services. The ASN are used mainly at the local IXP, where RFC 1930 and private ASN won't be useful, but at the same time external connectivity is default routed to the transit provider. Thus the ASN are not seen in any AS_PATH by any data collector, doesn't mean that they are not being used.

thanks

-- gaurab


/////////////////////////////////////////////////////+9779851038080
gaurab at lahai dot com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFC7ltOSo7fU26F3X0RAnbuAKC7BtfKZ8lD1g+v2bdcn0EAryCU6QCcDxB2
YiXVItqcDhB5i+mAijEBNzQ=
=LJLZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----