[address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Fri Nov 18 17:20:15 CET 2005
On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 04:28:17PM +0100, Carsten Schiefner wrote: > Michael, > > Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com 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
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]