Posing the question about 4-byte ASNs in my review of the BGPSec design reqs draft yesterday makes me wonder about the same in pfx- validate. The draft makes reference to AS_PATH in several locations. I'm thinking that we need a comment early in the draft stating that for the remainder of the draft no distinction is being made between AS_PATH and AS4_PATH, and that this standard is expected to support origin validation of both. Or alternatively, specify that this validation is performed on AS4_PATH and require support for 4893 as a prerequisite for SIDR. If we don't explicitly require hosts that support SIDR origin validation to support 4-byte ASN, we may also need some direction regarding specific handling for AS23456, such as to always treat as unknown since there is no way to determine validity for the combination of a prefix and a non-unique placeholder ASN (except for local TA), but we don't necessarily want those routes to be treated as invalid.
I think it's fair to assume that routers supporting origin validation also support 4893.
- Pradosh _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
