11 Dec
2015
11 Dec
'15
11:55 a.m.
On Fri, 11 Dec 2015, Egbert - DD9QP wrote:
Regardless wether there is a registry, policy, human-
or computerbased
IP-Net-to-ASN-Generator out there, we all have to respect one minimal policy
to keep everything running in the future:
Don't use concurrent private-ASN-proposals in parallel!
Actually, not really. This is not the same problem as combining multiple
private-IP zones that have overlapping addresses. This is a tagging issue
- addresses aren't duplicated. As long as private tags are
filtered/consolidated with normal ASNs at some border and continue to do
so, even when the private ASN zones begin to touch, there really isn't
that big of a problem. And when the need to deconflict ASNs actually does
arise, renumbering ASNs at peering borders should not be anywhere near as
painful as renumbering addresses throughout a network. Ie. the urgency to
move everyone to a single universal private-AS (is that an oxymoron? :) )
numbering scheme seems a bit exaggerated.
Antonio Querubin
e-mail: tony(a)lavanauts.org
xmpp: antonioquerubin(a)gmail.com