[address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Stephane Bortzmeyer
bortzmeyer at nic.fr
Thu Jan 8 10:58:16 CET 2004
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 08:14:12PM +0200, Pekka Savola <pekkas at netcore.fi> wrote a message of 14 lines which said: > .. until someone figures out that, hey, each ccTLD actually requires > more entries (e.g., 3), because having just one prefix for all the > servers increases the danger/threat of a routing system hiccup for a > prefix.. Most ccTLD plan to anycast only some of their servers and to keep at least two unicast machines, for this very reason.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]