From: Scott Morris (smorris@ipexpert.com)
Date: Thu Jan 31 2008 - 13:29:12 ARST
I suppose that depends on who you are going to peer with and what their AS
numbers are.
While public AS numbers are good because you have a relative guarantee of no
overlap, it's not always necessary. As a mobile phone provider, I'm having
a hard time visualizing who you would peer with that would not be a public
AS already. (e.g. real ISPs and not end customers)
But otherwise, situations like these are why we have exciting technologies
such as BGP Confederations or the Local-AS command set!
If you're worried about overlap on AS numbers, don't pick the obvious ones!
Most docs have 64512-64519 or 65000-65009 in them. Don't use those. Pick
something like 64739 or some weird number like that and your chances of
overlap are statistically reduced.
Cheers,
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, JNCIE-M
#153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.
CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-ER
VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc.
IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
A Cisco Learning Partner - We Accept Learning Credits!
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
http://www.ipexpert.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Gabriel Nunes
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:20 AM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: Public or Private AS
Hi Experts!
I work for a mobile phone provider which is intending to provide VPN MPLS
service that require the use of MP-BGP protocol into the backbone MPLS.
The question is regarding the AS number to use in the backbone. I believe
that they need to configure a public AS instead of a private AS to avoid
some kind of overlapping issues with the customer, and BGP AS-Path issues as
well.
I'd like to hear from your side the key technical points to justify the use
of a public AS in the backbone for this service. Any?
Thanks,
Gabriel Nunes CCIE#17737
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2008 - 16:54:47 ARST