On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 05:59:36PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > [In the context of the anycast community at-mic discussion during IETF-114] > > Grow WG, > > As part of the RFC process for Large BGP Communities, there was strong > objection to having any large communities set aside for special purposes. > > As a result of this, there are no designated ASes that are part of the > rather large deployment of BGP code that understands these communities for > "magic numbers" that is typical of various implementations for well known > communities. > > While there has been a few attempts to start discussion about designating > well known large communities, the above point means there is a fair amount > of resistance to the idea and inertia to overcome in IDR. > > Extended Communities, if they can hold the data in question, are effectively > free. Feel free to grab them at whim! > > -- Jeff (speaking partially as IDR chair and minimally as an IDR historian)
Yes. Especially if the objective is to signal the 'community setting AS'; extended communities are an appropriate tool as they have sufficient room for both 16-bit and 32-bit ASNs. Thanks for the reminder, Jeff! :-) A question to the working group: is signaling the 'sending ASN' a critical characteristic of the concept outlined in the anycast-community draft? If not, a simple RFC 1997 well-known community is probably more suitable. Kind regards, Job _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
