Subject: New Issue AS path

From: "Natale, Jonathan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:06:59 -0400

What about the fact that an AS_SET counts as 1 (in IOS)???  Is that already
in the spec?

Does juniper set AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE to 0 too?

What about AS_CONFED_SETs?  Does anybody use these?

I don't think we want to put stuff in [to the draft] just because IOS does
it; it might be nice to put stuff in that covers Juniper and IOS, if and
only if it affect interoperability.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey Haas [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 3:28 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: issue 11

On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 03:22:02PM -0400, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
> It would be useful to add this to the RR RFC.

That would be my preferred action.

However, I would also prefer that the AS_PATH length calculation for
confederation segments (i.e. they have zero value) also be moved into the
confed update.

> Curtis

-- 
Jeff Haas 
NextHop Technologies

---

From: Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:21:09 -0400

> What about the fact that an AS_SET counts as 1 (in IOS)???  Is that already

That got moved into the spec.  It even makes sense, even it means
aggregates that aggregate as_paths may have shorter paths than
their contributing routes.

> What about AS_CONFED_SETs?  Does anybody use these?

GateD supports these.

> only if it affect interoperability.

Things that affect route selection affect everyone.  Its best to be
consistant.

-- 
Jeff Haas 
NextHop Technologies

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 18:35:18 -0400

In message <[email-masked]
> What about the fact that an AS_SET counts as 1 (in IOS)???  Is that already

That's in 9.1.2.2:

      a) Remove from consideration all routes which are not tied for
      having the smallest number of AS numbers present in their AS_PATH
      attributes. Note, that when counting this number, an AS_SET counts
      as 1, no matter how many ASs are in the set, and that, if the
      implementation supports [13], then AS numbers present in segments
      of type AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE or AS_CONFED_SET are not included in
      the count of AS numbers present in the AS_PATH.

> Does juniper set AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE to 0 too?

I'd say yes but don't know for sure.

> What about AS_CONFED_SETs?  Does anybody use these?

Don't think that's every used, but if so if AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE is not
counted, it would apply to AS_CONFED_SET.

> only if it affect interoperability.

It looks like it is already covered in draft-17.  See above.

Curtis