Hi
David K-
Your the second person who's told me that; thanks.
For a large organization with a few thousand branch sites (using BGP for
internal inter-connectivity and without the need to advertise the
AS_Path to the pubic Internet), I was thinking it be nice designate a
private ASN per site.
Of course this count would exceed that of what 2byte / 16 bit ASN would
prescribe per RFC-1930. I was hoping that maybe the use of 4byte /
32bit ASN would provide an expanded range of private ASN to meet this
requirement.
I was hoping to avoid BGP trickery such AS-overide and the like.
Thanks again for the feedback.
--
Regards,
Ge Moua
University of Minnesota Alumnus
Email: moua0...@umn.edu
--
On 2/15/12 5:16 PM, Daniel Kratz wrote:
Hi Ge Moua,
IANA did not allocate 4bytes AS to private use[1]. Probably they
considered that the range between 64512 ~ 65534 from 16bits ASN is enough.
The 32bits ASN is easy to get/justify than 16bits ASN... Same thinking
is valid to get an IPV6 CIDR.
[]'s
Kratz
[1] - IANA Autonomous System Numbers
http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers/as-numbers.xml
2012/2/15 Ge Moua <moua0...@umn.edu <mailto:moua0...@umn.edu>>
Does anyone know if there is a RFC standard that define private
use of (32bit) 4byte ASN? I was hoping that since 4byte ASN
allows for a much larger range then the same would be for
best-practice use of private ASN as well.
--
Regards,
Ge Moua
moua0...@umn.edu <mailto:moua0...@umn.edu>
--
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
<mailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
--
"Any fool can know. The point is to understand."
Albert Einstein
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
