[lir-wg] AS Number Policy

--On Wednesday, July 10, 2002 10:38:58 -0400 "Lu, Ping" <PLu at cw.net> wrote:

>> Yes. I had recently a lengthy "discussion" with RIPE hostmasters about
>> a multihomed AS of a customer. Primary upstream with us, secondary
>> upstream with AS702. Using 702:80 community to lower localpref within
>> 702, making the backup link real backup. As 702 announces best path
>> (which is via their peering to us to the customer), RIPE was unable to
>> see the 702 backup announcement anywhere. Explanation of BGP basics by
>> myself were not understood or ignored. Or both. They also did not
>> contact AS702 for simple confirmation of what I've told them.
>> Took three
>> or four emails to get that finally sorted out. Whom do I bill
>> those 30-45
>> minutes to (rhetoric question)? ;->
>>
>
> This is another good example why AS number is originated but invisible
> to the global routing table.
>


I don't read it as beeing invisible - just seen throug one path.

- kurtis -