I begin my questioning by mentioning the recent moves towards standardization of BGP Roles made formalized initially by RFC 9234, and also by what is proposed with the ASPA that we should see soon. And from what I can see, it makes a lot of sense to have an IRR representation through AS-SET of the list of ASNs that you would have a neighborhood relationship in each role. This is done with the objective of being able to make public (if desired) the type of relationship that each ASN with its Peers, and also to be able to build, and publish (if desired) in a better elaborated way the Routing Policies of each ASN. In view of this, I was wondering if: Any kind of standardization for the naming of these AS-SETs that would represent this group of peers had already been considered? Something that came to my mind would be to use the strings proposed by RFC9234 for the IANA REGISTRY and use it as a suffix for the AS-SET name. AS<AS_Number>:AS-ROLE-<Suffix_String_of_Role_Defined_on_rfc9234> Exemplifying: as-set: AS65123:AS-ROLE-PROVIDER descr: ASN list of Transit Upstream(Providers) of AS65123. as-set: AS65123:AS-ROLE-CUSTOMER descr: ASN list of Transit Downstream(CUSTOMER) of AS65123. as-set: AS65123:AS-ROLE-PEER descr: ASN list of Networks that AS65123 do some kind of peering. as-set: AS65123:AS-ROLE-RS descr: ASN list of Route-Servers with which AS65123 has a BGP neighborhood. as-set: AS65123:AS-ROLE-RS-CLIENT descr: ASN list of Route-Server Clients the route-servers of AS65123. Any thoughts or considerations on this? -- Douglas Fernando Fischer Engº de Controle e Automação