[address-policy-wg] Real multihoming or anycast?

> > Why not learn from the lessons of radio spectrum? A fixed number of
> > 3G frequency allocations were put up for auction (or beauty contest).
> > 
> > Why should RIPE not offer a limited number of /32 allocations for
> > operators of anycast fabrics? I suggest that RIPE offer 16 allocations
> > of /32 to organizations who intend to operate diverse anycast fabrics
> > globally to serve TLD operators and others who can benefit from 
> > an anycast fabric. Select the winners by beauty contest based on 
> > technical and commercial fitness.
> 
> Very simple answer for what is possible with _CURRENT_ policy:
> $ whois -h whois.arin.net GOOGLE-IPV6

As far as I know, Google is not a service provider. They 
operate their own network for their own business. I am 
suggesting that a certain number of /32's should be given
to companies which will provide global anycast meshes
as a service to 3rd party customers. That way, TLD operators
can choose one or more anycast hosting services to host
their "critical" service.

This makes more sense than giving a /32 to everyone who
feels that their service is "critical". If you analyse the
situation by the 80/20 rule, then Google represents the
20% of "critical" services that are big enough to be their
own ISP. My suggestion is meant to support the 80% of
"critical" services that could benefit from the same 
technology as Google, but which are not large enough to
go it alone.

--Michael Dillon