On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, Abhishek Verma wrote:
Since i smell some traces of sarcasm here.
On 8/30/05, Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thank everyone who took time off their busy schedules and answered me
on
this. I now understand that people do look at the AS_PATH and the
As no one has asked yet, allow me.. what are you trying to do?
Basically I was thinking on these lines.
If i have an AS path {1 2} [3 4] { 5 } then is it possibleto pull the AS in the last segment and merge it with the first segment? This would give me {1 2 5} [3 4]. This way i dont need to
### On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 11:02:18 +0100 (BST), Stephen J. Wilcox
### [EMAIL PROTECTED] casually decided to expound upon Abhishek
### Verma [EMAIL PROTECTED] the following thoughts about Re:
### Order of ASes in the BGP Path:
SJW from time to time people say 'but the rfc says...'. but theres a big
Hi,
Is the order of AS numbers (except for perhaps the first one which
denotes the AS the route was originated from) in the AS_PATH in BGP
important? In fact, does anybody even care for the first AS number
that appears in the Path?
AFAIK, AS numbers in the BGP serves two purposes. It helps in
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 10:15:26PM +0530, Abhishek Verma wrote:
Hi,
Is the order of AS numbers (except for perhaps the first one which
denotes the AS the route was originated from) in the AS_PATH in BGP
important? In fact, does anybody even care for the first AS number
that appears in
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 22:15:26 +0530
From: Abhishek Verma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Order of ASes in the BGP Path
Hi,
Is the order of AS numbers (except for perhaps the first one which
denotes the AS the route was originated from) in the AS_PATH in BGP
important? In fact, does anybody
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Robert Bonomi wrote:
Per the RFCs on the subject, if you _receive_ an unordered set from
a downstream, you can propogate that unordered set, but you must
prepend your AS in the 'ordered' fashion.
Right.
And you must use the ordered path tagging for any new stuff you
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Abhishek Verma wrote:
Legend: {} denotes the sequence, while [] denotes the set
Path {1 2} [3 4] {5}
Would somebody mind if this was represented as {1 2 5} [3 4] ?
Yes, they are different paths. You are allowed to merge adjacent
sequences, eg:
{1 2} {5} [3
seems to me that, if your questions are not clearly answered by the
bgp specs, then something is sorely broken.
randy
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Abhishek Verma writes:
Hi,
Is the order of AS numbers (except for perhaps the first one which
denotes the AS the route was originated from) in the AS_PATH in BGP
important? In fact, does anybody even care for the first AS number
that appears in the Path?
AFAIK, AS
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Abhishek Verma wrote:
Hi,
Is the order of AS numbers (except for perhaps the first one which
denotes the AS the route was originated from) in the AS_PATH in BGP
important? In fact, does anybody even care for the first AS number
that appears in the Path?
AFAIK, AS
I thank everyone who took time off their busy schedules and answered me on this. I now understand that people do look at the AS_PATH and the order of ASes is important for debugging, etc.
Regards,
Abhishek
On 8/29/05, Richard A Steenbergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at
I thank everyone who took time off their busy schedules and answered me on
this. I now understand that people do look at the AS_PATH and the order of
ASes is important for debugging, etc.
and thank you for reading the rfc
randy
Legend: {} denotes the sequence, while [] denotes the set
Path {1 2} [3 4] {5}
As I understand the specs, that is -not- allowed. an unordered set
can appear only as the _last_ element of the AS path list.
Yes, I understand that right now it is not possible to receieve or
generate
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Abhishek Verma wrote:
Legend: {} denotes the sequence, while [] denotes the set
Path {1 2} [3 4] {5}
Would somebody mind if this was represented as {1 2 5} [3 4] ?
I see it as a bad idea for bgp table / routing analysis as it
completely confuses who is #5 really
You can *not* merge AS_SET's, as the current BGP specs imply an
AS_SET has a fixed path-length, hence you should NOT merge the sets
in:
{1 2} [3 4] [5 6]
into:
{1 2} [3 4 5 6]
as the former path has a length of 3, the latter a length of just 2 -
merging sets could
Since i smell some traces of sarcasm here.
On 8/30/05, Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thank everyone who took time off their busy schedules and answered me on this. I now understand that people do look at the AS_PATH and the order of
ASes is important for debugging, etc.and thank you for
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, Tom Sanders wrote:
This is one thing that i have always been aware of but dont see it
mentioned in the BGP draft which can be quite confusing to the
newbies. Is it possible to explicitly mention this in
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-26.txt?
Impossible given draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-26
18 matches
Mail list logo
