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] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Elmar K. Bins
elmi at 4ever.de
Wed Mar 23 15:00:08 CET 2005
kurtis at kurtis.pp.se (Kurt Erik Lindqvist) wrote: > > Howeverm, the "out of a single block" is the part that really bothers > > me. Putting supposedly "critical infrastructure" as it is called > > elsewhere in a block that makes them all share fate in the event of > > network "optimisations" is still a bad idea. > > Well, this can be argued the otherway around as well. We know that ISPs > filter out previously unused space, and that they are not very active > in updating those filters when IANA starts allocating out of new > blocks. Having all in well-known block would limit that. Additionally, once someone starts filtering, they will receive much more pressure than if the block contained only one piece of "critical infrastructure". As always the coin has two sides :) Elmar. -- "Begehe nur nicht den Fehler, Meinung durch Sachverstand zu substituieren." (PLemken, <bu6o7e$e6v0p$2 at ID-31.news.uni-berlin.de>) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]