> On Aug 6, 2018, at 8:20 AM, Nick Hilliard <[email protected]> wrote: > > Job Snijders wrote on 06/08/2018 14:22> RFC 5396 > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5396 described the "asdot+" and >> "asdot" representation formats for AS numbers. >> I'd personally prefer a single canonical way to represent ASNs >> (asplain), and while RFC 5396 proposes the adoption of a decimal value >> notation 'asplain', I don't think there is a document actively >> discouraging the use of asdot and asdot+ >> We've come across asdot+ notation in strange places such as RPSL, and >> I'm not yet sure how to proceed >> https://github.com/irrdnet/irrd4/issues/48 > > Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send. I.e. check > for asdot on inbound nrtm feeds and convert to asplain, with no option to > convert to asdot output. It's inexplicable why anyone would output or use > asdot these days. > > IIRC, Afrinic is the only RIR which outputs asdot from their whois server. > Everyone else changed to asplain around 2009.
And these days, if you want as-dot in your stuff, you should expect to throw a knob to have that happen. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
