[address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
Jørgen Hovland jorgen at hovland.cx
Mon Nov 14 12:19:05 CET 2005
-----Original Message----- From: Elmar K. Bins [mailto:elmi at 4ever.de] >But you're trying to lure us away from the proposal we're discussing which >states a special case of DNS for _ccTLDs... > >The requirements for v6 space in the RIPE region includes having transit >customers (at all, the 200 is just an arbitrary number). No ccTLD registry >that's not also conducting other business may receive an allocation. That's >the entire point of the special case being made. ccTLDs cannot deliver >services in v6 like in v4. This - IMHO - is a v6 showstopper. So we are back at the beginning; I say no to anycast PI for TLDs/ccTLDs. I don't believe it is a special case so it doesn't need a special policy. TLDs/ccTLDs could/should however be used as an argument to allow v6 PI prefixes in general. V6 PI compared to v4 surely is a showstopper for many, or at least for some. Cheers, Joergen Hovland
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]