RE: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or so methingelse?

> > Consequently I support giving the TLD operators the tools they
> > need to make it a stable service.
> 
> yes.  and how do you go from here to special address allocations?
> do we also need special computers?  special electricity?  special
> racks?

I also agree that DNS is part of the Internet's critical
infrastructure and that TLD's are more critical than the
average end user domain. That is why I am opposed to DENIC's
application to change policy and impose a bureaucratic process
around building anycast deployments.

There is no barrier preventing DENIC and AFNIC and others
from deploying global anycast to serve the domains that they
host from their TLD registries. Many, many companies in Europe
are happily operating hosting facilities that host all sorts
of applications using a wide range of protocols including
the DNS protocol that is used in DENIC's hosting service.

But DENIC's customers should be asking themselves why DENIC
is wasting their time in this political process to change 
RIPE policy instead of building their anycast infrastructure.
If they don't move quickly, then someone else will build that
anycast infrastructure and both DENIC and AFNIC will be reduced
to being customers instead of network operators.

As long as they keep running the critical DNS infrastructure
I am happy. Whether they outsource the anycast network entirely
or participate in building their own, it doesn't matter much.

--Michael Dillon