idr@ietf.org
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Idr] Re: Last Call: 'Canonical representation of 4-byte AS numbers'

Subject: Re: [Idr] Re: Last Call: 'Canonical representation of 4-byte AS numbers' to Informational RFC draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation
From: Bill Fenner
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 06:36:52 -0700
>[If you just use larger decimal values,]
>... how do you distinguish between a 2-byte only AS number and a  
>4-byte AS number which happens to be less than 0.65535?

When is this difference significant?  0.7018 == 7018, an AS number
is an AS number.  There are some AS numbers that can *only* be
represented in 4 bytes, but there isn't a different space for the
4-byte values.

I'm in the "having a common notation is better than not" camp - there is
no perfect notation, but if everyone ends up using the same notation,
it'll improve consistency and reduce confusion.  (I'd be willing to be
convinced "no notation is OK", i.e., people don't have a problem with
using longer and longer decimal strings - we probably don't expect to
get to 4294967295 but some would argue that's too long for people to
easily remember)

  Bill

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>