RE: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?

[Jørgen Hovland <]

-----Original Message-----
From: address-policy-wg-admin@localhost
[
	    
	    
] On Behalf Of
Michael.Dillon@localhost
Sent: 11. november 2005 15:10

>> I am therefore against any proposal about anycast prefix allocations no
>> matter whom and what it concerns.  Do whatever you want between your 
>>peers
>> if your agreement permits; just don?t put the prefix in the dfz. I don't
>> think it belongs there.
>
>I think that some anycast prefixes *DO* belong in the dfz. 
>However, I think that it is wrong to give out anycast
>prefix allocations to organizations whose only intent
>is to run their own internal services. The .de TLD is
>proposing that they should get a prefix just for their
>own anycast services.

We are probably thinking the same but have two different solutions for it.

If you have a medium/large international network you can implement anycast
without using prefixes assigned to you by the RIR for anycast usage. If you
do not have a medium/large international network then you can contact
someone who has. If this is a question about money then I am sure some
network operator eventually will lower their prices to meet your
satisfaction.

Company X/DENIC may contact company Y/MCI. MCI may place 500 DENIC servers
around the world at their collocation facilities. MCI may then assign DENIC
one /64 prefix from their /32 prefix which will be routed to the closest
DENIC server in MCIs network.
	Would this be a suitable solution? This /32 has not been given to
MCI by the RIR explicit for anycast purposes.

The other solution is that DENIC builds their own international network and
do the same - as long as the prefix has not been given to DENIC by the RIR
solely for anycast purposes. 


Cheers,

Joergen Hovland