The proposal was that transit ASNs would begin with 12 leading 0 bits and non-transit ASNs would not. As such, 1312 would not be a non-transit ASN. The proposal wasn't for "parallel" ASN space. The proposal was to have a range of ASNs for leaf-networks and a range for transit networks, allowing transit networks to make more rational (possibly automated) decisions about route aggregation. Owen --On Monday, December 6, 2004 12:54 PM -0500 Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 15:23:55 PST, Owen DeLong said:
I don't see non-transit ASN leakage as any greater issue than current private ASN leakage.
If somebody leaks a private ASN, we can tell that it's a private ASN by inspection.
If somebody is using '1312' inside their parallel ASN space and accidentally leaks it, it's a bit harder to diagnose.
And if somebody is leaking 1312, I'll be quite put out... ;)
-- If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.