Description of problem: Customer has installed metallb operator and trying to configure BGPPeer , but they are having issues with creating it with below error message Error "Invalid value: 4247584822: spec.peerASN in body should be less than or equal to 65535" for field "spec.peerASN" They are not able to create PeerBGB because customer's ASN value seems to be out of range. just installed the metalLB operator but not able to configure yet They are using 4 byte ASN (4247584822) on their Cisco Routers, since peer cannot understand 4 byte, they are converting 4 byte to 2 byte AS which will be in decimal format (64813.54) Peer ASN configured in the DC Gateway are: 2-Byte AS Number: 64813.54 4-Byte AS Number: 4247584822 ASN on Cisco ASR Router cannot be changed, as it is in production supporting thousands on Pods. It looks like 2-Byte AS is a kind of legacy numbering and when asked on FRR channel seems like we we don't have 4 bytes support and asked for Asdot fmt maybe something can be added in the next OCP releases Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): OCP 4.10 How reproducible: Depends on the environment and infra used (Cisco routers) Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Giving Error Expected results: Either 2 byte AS format or 4 Byte should be supported Additional info: We had some discussions in forum-bgp regarding this topic FYR , below link https://coreos.slack.com/archives/C01EH16NFPZ/p1654519132159399
metallb BGP stack only support 2 bytes plain AS format, customers wanted to peer with metallb need adhere to the same format there is no plan to support either 2 bytes dot AS format nor 4 bytes ASN at the moment.
Reopening this as we are going to introduce the support for 4 bytes asn.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory (Moderate: OpenShift Container Platform 4.12.0 bug fix and security update), and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2022:7399