Subject: Complex AS Path Aggregating

From: "Natale, Jonathan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 11:06:25 -0400

This issue seems to have been lost, or maybe I never posted it.

The part in the draft about complex AS path aggregation could/should be
deleted.  The current draft implies that when aggregating, for example
(1st):

1 2 4 3

w/

3 4 6 5

and

5 6 7 8

then

1 2 {3 4 5 6} 7 8

...would be OK

AFAIK, all implementations aggregate by either: (2nd)putting ONLY the local
AS in the path (and setting the atomic) OR (3rd)by creating 1 giant set and
adding the local AS as a seq.

1 test equipment vendor went as far as to create such a test(for the 1st),
which "FAILED".  But if you read the draft carefully, clumping all the AS's
into a set passes.

---

From: Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 11:10:06 -0400

> adding the local AS as a seq.

If vendors choose to implement the complex as path aggregation, thats
fine.  If they do simple, thats fine.

Vendors should be able to receive and use either without problem.  *That*
is what the conformance tests should test.

-- 
Jeff Haas 
NextHop Technologies