[address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Kurtis Lindqvist
kurtis at kurtis.pp.se
Thu Mar 24 12:05:44 CET 2005
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote: > In a perfect world - yes. > > But "per default" when you announce something in v6-world, you are > "supposed" to announce a /32 (or maybe a /35) _and_ filter anything that > is longer than that. > > I really don't see any benefit from adding complexity again, other than > clinging to the well-worn conservatiopn goal from IPv4. This is a myth that is hard to kill. There are already today valid, RIR assignments that are /48s. If you where to do what you state above, you have already missed out a part of the IPv6 Internet and there is not much to do. The "filter on /32" comes from some belife that that would be the longest assigned or allocated prefixes. That is not true, and the policy proposed would add to that. I have a hard time seeing what harm consvertaion does and what complexity it would add? - kurtis -
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]