North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing

  • From: Jared Mauch
  • Date: Thu Mar 02 09:38:30 2006

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
> > 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

	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++;      |  My statements are only mine.