This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: 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 ]
Kurt Erik Lindqvist
kurtis at kurtis.pp.se
Fri Jan 9 08:34:11 CET 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> |That's why I'm in favour to have a policy that permits >> |allocations for specific, well-defined Anycast services. That >> |allocations would come from a well-known block, so people >> |would know to not filter /24s from there (and so on). >> >> What should the cirteria to get "Anycast space" be ? > > I had a proposal that nobody commented on :-) - it didn't mention > "critical" anywhere, so maybe it wasn't sexy enough. > > I suggested: > -------------------------- > - Anycast deployment > - multiple distributed servers bring benefits for the whole community > - due to protocol limitations this cannot be done using other > approaches > (like "put up 100 servers at various ISP networks, using PA space > from > those ISPs") > -------------------------- I think this has the same problem as "critical infrastructure" in that you now need to define "benefits for the whole community". Second, with the definition above, if I am an ISP that decides to anycast my DNS-servers, do I get the "anycast space"? To be honest, I think you need to nail down what we are talking about. Maybe we will need a "Anycasted RIPE NCC Service Region TLD DNS-server space". > b) can be evaluated by a RIPE NCC hostmaster, so there must be clear > and *easy* rules - it needs not be easy to get the space, but to > say "you go - you don't" should be easy. I think that anycasting is a problem (been there, done that, waiting for the t-shirt) when it comes to getting address space. I am sure you can find a swamp C-block, as Randy suggested - BUT I do think there is a point in registering a block correctly and getting it in a legitimate way. Now, if what we are trying to solve is anycasting for TLD DNS-servers in the RIPE NCC Service region, why don't we just write that? If it turns out there is a problem of anycasting Goolge-servers in the region that is considered to be painful enough that we all think they should get special treatment, let's write that up then. - - kurtis - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0.3 iQA/AwUBP/5ZdqarNKXTPFCVEQKcewCeMO17WmDzCOXaDARCnknpRLvxROcAoIS8 BYza7ha5BypTwxGGNfdbUDMQ =UZvo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: 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 ]