On 4/18/2014 4:32 PM, William Herrin wrote: > On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Jason Schiller <[email protected]> wrote: >> The ARIN community continues to suggest there is no hardware reason that >> would prevent support of 4-byte ASNs. The community desires that we use up >> the 2-byte ASNs and continue to send a message that code upgrades to support >> 4-byte ASNs are now required. > > > Question: > > Large ISPs implement BGP communities with a convention of 16-bit ASN > followed by 16-bits of locally defined meaning, such as set local pref > to 80. > > Does a comparable convention exist when dealing with 32-bit ASNs? If > not, what's the plan? > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > > >
RFC 5668 - 4-Octet AS Specific BGP Extended Community http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5668 -DMM
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
