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

On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 04:28:17PM +0100, Carsten Schiefner wrote:
> Michael,
> 
> Michael.Dillon@localhost wrote:
> >[...]
> >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.
> 
> why would that be?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 	Carsten

	because, apparently, customers aka service operators are 
	inferior to network operators aka plumbers.  a $DEITY forbid
	that an TLD operator ego be brused by not being considered in
	the same class as plumbers.  

	tongue partly in cheek.

	perhaps there is the consideration that TLD ops are "special"
	in some unique way that preclueds them from fate-sharing with
	a plumber when the pipes break.  e.g.  they have not taken steps
	to distribute their service or content so that it is available 
	over different carriers, on alternate power grids, in other 
	countries. ... and perhaps ... using a variety of  publishers
	... instead of trying to run all that infrastructure in addition
	to operating the TLD.   OR...  why do tld operators have to have
	all the servers under infrastructure they run?  when did this change?

	example:
	DEnic could have CNnic, BRnic, and CAnic run slave servers for them
	in their areas.  Why is this a bad thing? 

--bill