1 / 14

Standardizing 4-Byte AS Numbers Delegation Proposal

This proposal recommends APNIC to standardize 4-byte AS numbers in ASPLAIN to address compatibility issues with ASDOT format. It highlights problems with ASDOT, lack of support, and the need for timely implementation. The proposal has support from IETF and network operators, signaling the importance of adopting the ASPLAIN format.

dmorones
Download Presentation

Standardizing 4-Byte AS Numbers Delegation Proposal

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. prop-065-v001 • Format for delegation and recording of 4-byte AS numbers • APNIC26 - Christchurch NZ

  2. prop-065-v001 • This proposal recommends that APNIC changes its procedures to standardise on delegating 4-byte AS numbers in the ASPLAIN format rather than the current ASDOT format. • This proposal extends to the data recorded in APNIC Whois Database records, with the proposal recommending that whois returns the same record for queries made in either format.

  3. prop-065-v001 • ASPLAIN & ASDOT • ASPLAIN • Defines the 4-byte AS Number as a basic 32 bit integer, it is the current • format used to represent 2 Byte AS Numbers e.g. • Original 2 Byte AS pool: 0 - 65535 • New 4-byte AS pool: 0 - 4294967295 • ASDOT • Defines the 4-byte AS Number as; • <higher16bits>.<lower16bits> • e.g. • 1.4541 would be used to represent the 32 bit integer 70077

  4. prop-065-v001 • Current Problem • APNIC assigns and records 4 Byte AS numbers in the ASDOT format. • Members have never been consulted • There is no RFC for ASDOT • RIRs and IANA have adopted ASDOT with consultation (ARIN) • We now know a bit more ... • Almost all operators would prefer to use ASPLAIN

  5. prop-065-v001 • Problems with ASDOT ... • ASDOT is wildly regarded as having compatibility problems. • AS-PATH regex is broken by the “.” • ^2.37$ (matches 2137, 2237, 2337 etc) • Internal Management systems (scripts, db etc) • IRR/RPSL

  6. prop-065-v001 • ASDOT has ... • Lack of support for ASDOT in the ‘operator’ community • Issues with SNMP, REGEX, IRR/RPSL etc • ‘Canonical Textual Representation of Four-octet AS Numbers’ - Expired • draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation-05.txt • Placing more problems in the path of 4byte adoption (bad)

  7. prop-065-v001 • Router Vendors are supporting ASPLAIN • Cisco will use ASPLAIN by default on all new code release / platforms • Juniper support ASPLAIN (9.2 will include ASDOT) • Force10 (current ASPLAIN) • Redback use “:” but moving to support ASPLAIN

  8. prop-065-v001 • What we have today • Two formats (no question here) • Operators using/preferring ASPLAIN • LIRs/Customers being allocated ASDOT

  9. prop-065-v001 • Customers will know their AS as something different • AS2.37 from the customer perspective • AS 131109 from the provider perspective • What to use for your CRM ? • What to use for the IRR/RPSL configuration • How to interact with the customer ?

  10. prop-065-v001 • Timing is critical • 1/1/09 (~4 months) will 4byte ASN are in the wild

  11. prop-065-v001 • Support • 1/1/09 (~4 months) will 4byte ASN are in the wild • If we as members want to use ASPLAIN now is the time

  12. prop-065-v001 • IETF • draft-huston-as-representation-00.txt • Strong support on the IDR mailing list • 12/14 responses supporting adoption of the draft • 13th has recently changed his opinion ?

  13. prop-065-v001 • “Having read this draft and having also previously commented on the problems the asdot/asdot+ formats create within SNMP/SMIv2 presentation, I support the adoption of this draft. “ • “The asdot/asdot+ formats will become a burden from the point of view of a network operator (specifically manipulation as subsets of strings). “ • “Having read the document, I support the asplain representation.” • “I would welcome adoption of this draft. “

  14. prop-065-v001 • IDR Updated: Enke Chen has called for the use of “::” • So now we have • . • : • :: • Integer • We in the APNIC have the opportunity to take operational matters in our hands

More Related