On 4 Oct 2016, at 13:12, Ignas Bagdonas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Extended communities cannot represent an equivalent of AS4:AS4 in a form that > standard communities can do with AS2:AS2, extended communities define a > container for 6 bytes of payload total regardless of interpretation. Right, but the case where in XX:YY YY is also an AS number is much less common than the case where XX is an AS number but YY is just a small integer. >> (If anyone has any data on RFC 5668 support out in the wild that would be >> useful.) > Pretty much any implementation. Not sure what you mean here. > It is still the same extended community, just with a different interpretation. Unless I'm mistaken, as a user you can't interact with extended communities unless the BGP implementation knows about the kind of extended community that you're dealing with. So if a router doesn't implement RFC 5668 there's no way for me to use the RFC 5668 communities. > some hacks (remapping and AS4 marker, both reuse standard communities, and > both are ugly). I'm interested in those hacks. Maybe they're ugly but at least we can start using them today, and when the router vendors implement the hacks they'll show up as AS:nn as usual without any chicken/egg or boil the ocean issues. _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
