This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[routing-wg]Representation of four byte AS numbers.
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]Dubai Agenda
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]Representation of four byte AS numbers.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Rob Evans
rhe at nosc.ja.net
Sun Oct 19 11:47:56 CEST 2008
Hi all, At some point in the coming week I expect to see a new policy proposal hit the policy-announce and address-policy mailing lists that we might want to be aware of here. In past working group sessions we've already discussed the benefits and disadvantages of the various methods of representing 32 bit ASNs (i.e. 'asplain,' 'asdot'). There is now an internet-draft recommending asplain (which is just a single 32 bit integer) in last call at the IETF which can be obtained from the following URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-as-representation-01.txt A related policy proposal reached consensus at the last APNIC meeting and is now in last call there: http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-065-v001.html Whilst we already have a presentation on experiences of using a 32 bit ASN scheduled for the Routing working group session, the policy is being discussed in the Address Policy working group. At the moment it will be presented during the session just before lunch on Tuesday morning. At the same time there will also be a presentation on the proposal for certification of PA resources, which you may also be interested in. All the best, Rob
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]Dubai Agenda
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]Representation of four byte AS numbers.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]