Actually, RFC 2270 is only suggested to be used when sites are homed to a single provider. In this case, there won't be origin AS inconsistencies. I believe most implementors (some listed, some not) of this "remove-private-as" capability only intended for it to be used in configurations where the source of the route(s) is homed only to a single upstream AS. -danny
...as well as rfc2260.
to be more specific, we have to note that two different options are considered there. if you use the first one (read rfc), then you cannot use private asn until you're ok with generating inconsistencies (and it seems from the previous discussions of this topic that this becomes (illegal? -> no answer...) practice for some smaller isps).
with the second option of 2260, you can use private asn since the more specific pa routes are always aggregated (and you cannot use confederations, btw).
after all, as was noted, remove-private-as on cisco can be replaced by a simple route map, and the attribute manipulation functionality should definitely exist on versalars... -- dima.
100% agree. i just wanted to note that there is another use of private asns, where confederations cannot be used at all. -- dima.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Danny McPherson Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 5:17 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Private ASN suppression
Actually, RFC 2270 is only suggested to be used when sites are homed to a single provider. In this case, there won't be origin AS inconsistencies.
I believe most implementors (some listed, some not) of this "remove-private-as" capability only intended for it to be used in configurations where the source of the route(s) is homed only to a single upstream AS.
-danny
...as well as rfc2260.
to be more specific, we have to note that two different options are considered there. if you use the first one (read rfc), then you cannot use private asn until you're ok with generating inconsistencies (and it seems from the previous discussions of this topic that this becomes (illegal? -> no answer...) practice for some smaller isps).
with the second option of 2260, you can use private asn since the more specific pa routes are always aggregated (and you cannot use confederations, btw).
after all, as was noted, remove-private-as on cisco can be replaced by a simple route map, and the attribute manipulation functionality should definitely exist on versalars... -- dima.
participants (2)
-
Danny McPherson -
Dmitri Krioukov