|
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as “work in progress.”
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 2, 2007.
Copyright © The IETF Trust (2007).
A single textual representation for four-octet Autonomous System (AS) numbers is defined. The syntax chosen avoids ambiguity with Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) community string representation of AS numbers. It is recommended that this textual representation be used by all documents, systems and user interfaces referring to four-octet AS numbers.
A single textual representation for four-octet Autonomous System (AS) numbers is defined. The syntax chosen avoids ambiguity with Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) community string representation of AS numbers.
A number of forms of representation have been discussed in various routing forums, and this document provides a taxonomy of the various representations that have been considered, and recommends the adoption of a textual representation scheme termed "asdot" notation.
It is recommended that only this "asdot" textual representation be used by all documents, systems and user interfaces referring to four-octet AS numbers.
- asplain
- refers to a syntax scheme of representing all AS numbers using decimal integer notation. Using asplain notation an AS number of value 65526 would be represented as the string "65526" and as AS number of value 65546 would be represented as the string "65546".
- asdot+
- refers to a syntax scheme of representing all AS numbers using a notation of two integer values joined by a period character: <high order 16-bit value in decimal>.<low order 16-bit value in decimal>. Using asdot+ notation, an AS number of value 65526 would be represented as the string "0.65526" and an AS number of value 65546 would be represented as the string "1.10".
- asdot
- refers to a syntax scheme of representing AS number values less than 65536 using asplain notation and representing AS number values equal to or greater than 65536 using asdot+ notation. Using asdot notation, an AS number of value 65526 would be represented as the string "65526" and as AS number of value 65546 would be represented as the string "1.10".
- four-octet AS numbers
- refers to AS numbers in the range 0.0 - 65535.65535 (using asdot+ notation), or 0 - 4294967295 (using asplain notation). Four-octet AS numbers are defined in [RFC4893] (Vohra, Q. and E. Chen, “BGP Support for Four-Octet AS Number Space,” May 2007.)
- four-octet only AS numbers
- refers to AS numbers in the range 1.0 - 65535.65535 (using asdot+ notation) or 65536 - 4294967295 (using asplain notation)
- two-octet only AS numbers
- refers to AS numbers in the range 0.0 - 0.65535 (using asdot+ notation), or 0 - 65535 (using asplain notation).
To avoid confusion, a single textual notation is useful for documentation, configuration systems, reports, and external tools and information repositories, but it is also necessary to observe that any recommendation regarding notation that changes existing use would represent an unwarranted imposition.
The asdot representation represents a reasonable compromise, in that it preserves the current convention of using an asplain representation for two-octet only AS number values, and proposes using the asdot+ notation for four-octet only AS numbers.
All systems that generate reports containing AS numbers MUST use this asdot notation to represent the AS number value.
Interfaces that accept AS number values MUST accept asdot notation by default, and SHOULD also be capable of correctly interpreting values expressed in asplain and asdot+ notation.
Initially, the ":" was proposed to separate the two-octet components for the four-octet AS number value.
It was noted that this representation clashes with use of the ":" character in community attribute syntax in BGP, and the representation of AS numbers in BGP community attributes would be ambiguous as a result of this choice of notation.
It has also been pointed out that Routing Protocol Specification Language (RPSL) [RFC2622] (Alaettinoglu, C., Villamizar, C., Gerich, E., Kessens, D., Meyer, D., Bates, T., Karrenberg, D., and M. Terpstra, “Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL),” June 1999.) [RFC4012] (Blunk, L., Damas, J., Parent, F., and A. Robachevsky, “Routing Policy Specification Language next generation (RPSLng),” March 2005.) AS-Set objects use the ":" character to denote sequences of AS objects forming a chain. Since the AS object would have had the ":" character embedded in the instance name, this would have required double-parsing to find four-octet AS number in AS-Set chains. This also is not acceptable.
It was also noted that AS numbers are used by network operations staff, and the larger values in the four-octet AS number set when using asplain notation introduces the increased risk of transcription error with these numbers.
[Note: not for publication. No changes are proposed for the IANA, as the IANA AS number registry, http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers, already uses asdot notation.]
The text of the definition of a four-octet AS is taken from [RIPE2005‑12] (Huston, G., “four-octet AS Number Policy,” Dec 2005.).
The terminology of "asplain", "asdot" and "asdot+" was originally devised and described by Juergen Kammer in January 2007 [KAMMER2007] (Kammer, J., “AS Number Formats,” Jan 2007.).
The authors thank Rudiger Volk, Joao Damas, Joe Abley, Peter Koch and Henk Uijterwaal for feedback and extensive comments on this document.
Many programming languages treat xxx.yyy numeric strings as real number values on input, and convert the value internally to a canonical floating point representation. Since the precision cannot be guaranteed to be preserved, this risks changing the value of the four-octet quantity on output, or by mis-placed arithmetical calculation.
Care must be taken that asdot notation strings are treated as 'special-purpose strings' on input and output, and parsed correctly to a four-octet quantity. It would be sensible to draft suitable function definitions to define the transform from presentation to internal value, as was done for IPv4 and IPv6 addresses with the inet_pton() and inet_ntop() functions.
The [RFC2622] (Alaettinoglu, C., Villamizar, C., Gerich, E., Kessens, D., Meyer, D., Bates, T., Karrenberg, D., and M. Terpstra, “Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL),” June 1999.) and [RFC4012] (Blunk, L., Damas, J., Parent, F., and A. Robachevsky, “Routing Policy Specification Language next generation (RPSLng),” March 2005.) specifications, and systems which manipulate AS numbers need to be reviewed for conformance with asdot textual representation, and for the syntactic implications of this representation.
[Note: This section is not for publication.]
An IANA Considerations section has been added to amend an existing registry.
The document now clarifies that it refers to a textual representation, the binary representation used on-the-wire is unaffected by this draft.
The terms "asplain", "asdot" and "asdot+" have been used, reflecting current discussion on this topic.
An IANA Considerations section has been removed, as the AS number registry uses asdot notation and no further changes would be required of the IANA registry according to the recommendation made here.
Grammatical errors were corrected.
A spellcheck was run.
| [RFC4893] | Vohra, Q. and E. Chen, “BGP Support for Four-Octet AS Number Space,” RFC 4893, May 2007 (TXT). |
| [KAMMER2007] | Kammer, J., “AS Number Formats,” Jan 2007. |
| [RFC2622] | Alaettinoglu, C., Villamizar, C., Gerich, E., Kessens, D., Meyer, D., Bates, T., Karrenberg, D., and M. Terpstra, “Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL),” RFC 2622, June 1999 (TXT). |
| [RFC4012] | Blunk, L., Damas, J., Parent, F., and A. Robachevsky, “Routing Policy Specification Language next generation (RPSLng),” RFC 4012, March 2005 (TXT). |
| [RIPE2005-12] | Huston, G., “four-octet AS Number Policy,” Dec 2005. |
| George Michaelson | |
| Asia Pacific Network Information Centre | |
| Level 1, 33 Park Road | |
| Milton, Queensland 4064 | |
| AU | |
| Phone: | +61 7 3858 3100 |
| Email: | ggm@apnic.net |
| Geoff Huston | |
| Asia Pacific Network Information Centre | |
| Level 1, 33 Park Road | |
| Milton, Queensland 4064 | |
| AU | |
| Phone: | +61 7 3858 3100 |
| Email: | gih@apnic.net |
Copyright © The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an “AS IS” basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA).