From ppml-bounces@arin.net Wed Dec 14 04:30:07 2005 To: ppml@arin.net From: Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 10:32:06 +0000 Subject: [ppml] Fw: ":" - Re: Proposed Policy: 4-Byte AS Number Policy Proposal
I'm also not thrilled with "2-byte only" and "4-byte only" ASN; there's too much chance of confusion with "2-byte" and "4-byte" ASNs which have a different enough meaning to warrant a better distinction. I'd prefer something like "legacy" vs. "expanded", "low" vs. "high", etc.
That's an example of the lack of plain English in the proposal. Why don't we just talk about AS numbers greater than 65535 or AS numbers less than 65536?
Because there is more to it than just that. :) there is the matter of whether they are represented by 2 bytes, or 4 bytes _in_transmission_. '0x00004F4F' is a '4-byte' AS number that has a value less than 65,536. It _should_ be treated identically with the 2-byte AS number '0x4F4F', as I understand the currently-proposed methodoloty, but there is no intrinsic reason why that _must _be the case. A two-byte AS number, and a 4-byte AS number with the SAME numeric value, _are_ distinguishable as =different= entities.
1. ARIN begin allocating AS numbers greater than 65535 to those who specifically request them starting on $date.
2. On $date ARIN will not allocate AS numbers less than 65536 unless a small number is specifically requested.
3. On $date, ARIN will no longer make a distinction between AS numbers less than 65536 and larger ones.
Guess what? I said it in plain English so I don't have to define what is an "AS number less than 65536" or an "AS number greater than 65535". I also don't have to invent silly new notations so that AS2 looks different after the change. A number is a number is a number.
Is it? <grin> Do you represent AS 17 in two bytes, or four? if you use 2 bytes, do you, "somewhere down the road", change to representing it with 4 bytes? or do you deal with 'mixed-length' codes "in perpetuity"?