North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:01:22PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote: > > I think you're missing that some people do odd > > things with their IPs as well, like have one ASN and 35 > > different sites where they connect to their upstream Tier69.net > > all with the same ASN. This means that their 35 offices/sites > > will each need a /32, not one per the entire asn in the table. > > > People who are doing that have not read the definition of the > term ASN and there is no reason that the community or public > policy should concern itself with supporting such violations > of the RFCs. An AS is a collection of prefixes with a consistent > and common routing policy. By definition, an AS must be a > contiguous collection of prefixes or it is not properly a > single AS. Using the same ASN to represent multiple AS is > a clear violation. > > It doesn't fit the RFC definition of AS. Therefore, there is no > reason to support such usage on a continuing basis. You violate > the RFC's you takes your chances. I guess all those root servers that use the same asn but connect to different networks (anycast) should get shut down quickly. This is a part of networking life today in the v4 space, and without any current changes, it will (is) the same in v6 routing as there is nothing different except a few more bits 32 => 128. No new routing protocol, nothing, except this shim6 thing which people don't seem interested in because it means network operators can't do the traffic engineering they need to. - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from [email protected] clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.