On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) <
sprev...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 1, 2017, at 5:48 PM, Anoop Ghanwani <an...@alumni.duke.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the responses.
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) <
> sprev...@cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 28, 2017, at 8:29 PM, Anoop Ghanwani <an...@alumni.duke.edu>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > - pg 5, line 1
> > > What is the criteria that allow sharing the AS number? Is there a
> reference?
> >
> >
> > we changed this to “use the same AS”. As explained in 4.3, using the
> same AS brings the update loop prevention mechanism so facilitate filtering
> and propagation.
> >
> >
> > I think your response is about the spine/leaf nodes. My comment is
> about the ToR nodes.
>
>
> the same applies. The rules and guidelines related to bgp deployment and
> AS numbering are the same.
>
>
In this draft, we have:
>>>
For efficient usage of the scarce 2-byte Private Use AS pool,
different Tier-3 nodes might share the same AS.
>>>
In RFC 7938, we have:
>>>
A unique ASN is allocated to every Tier 3 device (e.g., ToR) in
this topology.
>>>
What I am asking for is clarification on how different Tier-3 nodes might
share the same AS number.
Your comment above (referencing 4.3) is talking about a different scheme
(iBGP) in which case I am assuming all nodes (spine, leaf, tor) share the
same AS number.
Thanks,
Anoop
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
