ARIN Consultation: Hierarchical AS-SET Names
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hi all, I raised a request with ARIN to enforce the use of hierarchical AS-SET names in the ARIN DB moving forward, as is the case in RIPE, APNIC, and LACNIC. ARIN have opened a consultation process, which closes on the 23rd of May. If you would like to see ARIN also adopt the requirement for newly created AS-SETs to have hierarchical names, please visit the following page and contact ARIN to record your support for this request: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2025/2025-1/ With kind regards, James. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: ProtonMail wsG5BAEBCgBtBYJoJEmnCZCoEx+igX+A+0UUAAAAAAAcACBzYWx0QG5vdGF0 aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwanMub3JnVr0rmLS4qvSLMtY2CBRvsqBwDgmlr/3T+wYR 5vCgJC0WIQQ+k2NZBObfK8Tl7sKoEx+igX+A+wAAlAcP/3rM+XfpLxIm2iFw LfdKSMqSsRVll+1lUwvGzIGB6YoNvbwfenGURA7uYrsU5rMnYPNGM51grY2d xhKeXMcS55R1FDAM1k365n05cu1g7tezsXYeS/MEvjnbA+HrEZv2xkWq+K9b ChlaXzitweTaF8cF/HgPKMukWZigIbS9yb6TgjBMv20Nr+/3tAG8VtEL9FxE 9Wu601HlN4iNYBS79pOJlDEoU3QE1xZx3UDAjsRTwNebzknu6Ilh4wRSKdMc CLd9BpXScJQFnzjDCE3P4ldRk8GK3LbdtxX6aHGcdmcMPDTdJJPzn1Xp6NDY rx3KzeBsv6UOyiqxqtNr0riiSSv3o6/NkYaN52vjgjcrNulhbmijystE7t1P w1+aN/sOGHHf+X+Y/KR7b4eqW9K/HHNsTRY0ZFfNrYio3oRNhfv2Kl1stY7w XG4PUigTiifO4aNhzvYo+gQw+rylIKlG/JI8wMcHdirpk0dPe4r2Dv3cQgBs PZ+wcm9Q1scDKjIYzFn7sVoNluPiV1J7epyUTdmEwvkp2YFD3YLggnl/9c9F IrMhOAXO6p6ro2xZjb68b04aiRCvRIhRn43FyuOXbA/BBy+alu7VvTsdIJrt AC4PmudMYdeNFeD+fx30ra6GjQhAfDhx9rVxfty1wYeqnEnVPJalbwbpqDC2 iR0Z8Fb5 =f2NW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 07:43:51AM +0000, James Bensley via NANOG wrote:
I raised a request with ARIN to enforce the use of hierarchical AS-SET names in the ARIN DB moving forward
Thank you for taking this initiative!
ARIN have opened a consultation process, which closes on the 23rd of May.
If you would like to see ARIN also adopt the requirement for newly created AS-SETs to have hierarchical names, please visit the following page and contact ARIN to record your support for this request: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2025/2025-1/
I'd love to see this implemented for a few reasons: - helps reduce opportunity for (human) error - seems low hanging fruit to implement - no disruption to legacy configurations A more elaborate overview is available here: https://manrs.org/2022/12/why-network-operators-should-use-hierarchical-as-s... Kind regards, Job
I'll save some effort / time for others and share some findings on this based on researching this. First, the referenced RFC 2622 does define the syntax as described which is good, but it also lists a non-existent reference [20] for another doc on exactly how this works in regards to value restrictions. I did some poking and searching and found that RFC 2754 does indeed match the description of the reference and also defines the restriction of the values for the hierarchical 'set'. So this does validate for me. Second thing I would consider is whether to set this hierarchical value requirement to the 'route-set' objects as well. I am not suggesting that I am in favor or not in favor of this but do note that the hierarchical nature of the value may be enforced here as well if chosen. As is, I support but encourage evaluation of whether to include 'route-set' in the same restriction and document why or why not it was included. On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 3:51 AM Job Snijders via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 07:43:51AM +0000, James Bensley via NANOG wrote:
I raised a request with ARIN to enforce the use of hierarchical AS-SET names in the ARIN DB moving forward
Thank you for taking this initiative!
ARIN have opened a consultation process, which closes on the 23rd of May.
If you would like to see ARIN also adopt the requirement for newly created AS-SETs to have hierarchical names, please visit the following page and contact ARIN to record your support for this request:
https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2025/2025-1/
I'd love to see this implemented for a few reasons:
- helps reduce opportunity for (human) error - seems low hanging fruit to implement - no disruption to legacy configurations
A more elaborate overview is available here:
https://manrs.org/2022/12/why-network-operators-should-use-hierarchical-as-s...
Kind regards,
Job _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/N6TO3TE7...
-- [stillwaxin@gmail.com ~]$ cat .signature cat: .signature: No such file or directory [stillwaxin@gmail.com ~]$ cat .disclaimer All opinions are my own and do not represent any of my employer. [stillwaxin@gmail.com ~]$ cat .pronouns He/Him
participants (3)
-
James Bensley -
Job Snijders -
Michael Still