[address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
Jørgen Hovland jorgen at hovland.cx
Fri Nov 11 17:20:44 CET 2005
-----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com Sent: 11. november 2005 15:10 >> I am therefore against any proposal about anycast prefix allocations no >> matter whom and what it concerns. Do whatever you want between your >>peers >> if your agreement permits; just don?t put the prefix in the dfz. I don't >> think it belongs there. > >I think that some anycast prefixes *DO* belong in the dfz. >However, I think that it is wrong to give out anycast >prefix allocations to organizations whose only intent >is to run their own internal services. The .de TLD is >proposing that they should get a prefix just for their >own anycast services. We are probably thinking the same but have two different solutions for it. If you have a medium/large international network you can implement anycast without using prefixes assigned to you by the RIR for anycast usage. If you do not have a medium/large international network then you can contact someone who has. If this is a question about money then I am sure some network operator eventually will lower their prices to meet your satisfaction. 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. The other solution is that DENIC builds their own international network and do the same - as long as the prefix has not been given to DENIC by the RIR solely for anycast purposes. Cheers, Joergen Hovland
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]