Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
-
To: Jørgen Hovland <>
-
From: "Elmar K. Bins" <>
-
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:27:38 +0100
-
Cc: , ,
-
Mail-followup-to: "Elmar K. Bins" elmi@localhost,Jørgen Hovland jorgen@localhost,Michael.Dillon@localhost, address-policy-wg@localhost,ipv6-wg@localhost
-
Organization: unorganized since 1789
jorgen@localhost (Jørgen Hovland) wrote:
> 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.
Vendor/ISP dependence has never been a solution for better availability.
Michael and you are somewhat off the track IMHO. Read Gert's comment, too.
Yours,
Elmar.
--
"Begehe nur nicht den Fehler, Meinung durch Sachverstand zu substituieren."
(PLemken, bu6o7e$e6v0p$2@localhost)
--------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---
|
you are here: RIPE -> RIPE Maillists > Archives
