[address-policy-wg] 2007-02 New Policy Proposal (Change in IP Assignments for Anycasting DNS Policy)

Hi,

On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 05:21:24PM +0200, Jørgen Hovland wrote:
> I am not too fond of policies that are so restricted to certain
> types of technology. It may prevent innovative and/or competitive
> new solutions to be deployed to the masses. So sometimes I wonder
> why IP assignment policies specify layer 7 technology at all.

When that policy was made, people heavily objected to any sort of
"direct to the end user" (= PI) IPv6 assignments, but still, there was
a well-defined need for this specific application.

To be able to reach consensus between the DNS group ("we need this! now!") 
and the conservationists ("keep the flood gates closed!"), this policy was 
done in a very targeted way, with a limited scope.  Similar for IXP and 
Root DNS policies.

As I said before - if the IPv6 PI policy goes through, we can move all
the special-case policies to the big heap of historic garbage.  If not,
we'll have to live with a few exceptions that the ``majority'' of this
group agrees upon.

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  113403

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20070425/ad505a88/attachment.sig>