[address-policy-wg] Assignments for Critical Infrastruction
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Assignments for Critical Infrastruction
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Assignments for Critical Infrastruction
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Greg L.
bgp2 at linuxadmin.org
Mon Nov 17 19:53:29 CET 2008
Thanks for your fast reply. To be honest, I haven't seen multiple /24 IPv4 prefixes allocated (legally) to a single entity in Arin region just for DNS BGP Anycast service. In Ripe region you can't get /24 prefix allocated for DNS BGP anycast hosting if you are a normal business (like a DNS service provider who just wants to compete in this business crowd) unless you are gTLD or ccTLD. In Arin region you can get ONE /24 prefix for this purpose... This is why I am harsh with my comments to gTLD and ccTLD owners who now want more than one /24 prefix for DNS hosting in Ripe region... Sorry... Thanks! Greg http://www.linuxadmin.org/ At 19:54 2008.11.17., you wrote: >Greg, 2008/11/17 Greg L. <bgp2 at linuxadmin.org>: > Current IPv4 already >provides more advantage to ccTLD and gTLD with IPv4 /24 > prefix >allocations for BGP anycast than for other business entities that > would >like to get /24 prefix for BGP anycast DNS deployments. It does not >provide 'more advantage", RIPE policy provides just 'exactly ONE /24 IPv4 >prefix and exactly ONE /48 IPv6 prefix' and it's not enough if you want to >provide reliable infrastructure for TLD. > I don't see a reason why more >resources should be allocated to a specific > group/entities named under >"Critical infrastructure" category that still > compete with businesses >that are unable to get /24 BGP anycast assignment > for DNS solutions from >Ripe. This is not fair (it was a bit fair when gTLD > and ccTLD started >out 5+ years ago). All these other businesses relies on services provided >by ccTLD/gTLD, that's why. ccTLD/gTLD operation is almost as important as >root servers operations. Certainly there are some categories of TLDs >according to number of registered domains, but I would like to avoid a >discussion about how much domain you need to have registered to be allowed >to have /24 anycast prefix. Other reason could be that this would align >RIPE policy with other RIRs policies. > This is why many European >companies prefer Arin's IP space. Welcome to Arin! I am no ARIN policy >expert, but from what I remember there is no special policy for other >businesses in ARIN policy. But there is a special policy for 'critical >infrastructure' and TLD DNS operators is already using that. Now that's >unfair, we are basically punished for being in RIPE region, since you can >get more anycast prefixes from all other RIRs. And please note that most >of European TLDs are unable to move to other regions because of legal >stuff. It's much easier to get legal status in US if you are private >owned then if you are not-for-profit. Ondrej. -- OndÅej Surý technický >Åeditel/Chief Technical Officer ----------------------------------------- >CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o. -- .cz domain registry Americká 23,120 00 Praha >2,Czech Republic mailto:ondrej.sury at nic.cz http://nic.cz/ >sip:ondrej.sury at nic.cz tel:+420.222745110 >mob:+420.739013699 fax:+420.222745112 >-----------------------------------------
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Assignments for Critical Infrastruction
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Assignments for Critical Infrastruction
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]