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] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Lenz
slz at baycix.de
Tue Jun 12 23:54:05 CEST 2007
Hi, Andy Davidson wrote: > > Hi, > > Can I get the community's thoughts on this, please .. > > I think we have a well defined policy on what to do when someone needs > some PI in order to run an Anycasted DNS service. We set out a family > of requirements based on geographic diversity, for instance, that > clearly states what should be in place when a request for PI for DNS use > is made. > What if a company wants to try to deploy an anycasted production service > for something which is not DNS ? It could be a proprietary protocol, or > something standard like http. Is the community view that they should > just deaggregate some of their PA - which I don't like the sound of - or > apply for PI in the normal way, and pretend anycast isn't necessarily > involved ? during the first round of discussion on http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-02.html some people already raised their voice about "other anycast services, not being DNS" (see mailinglist archives). The problem is, noone came up with some concrete idea what that might be. You obviously don't have an idea about some concrete example either. ==> Currently it doesn't look like there is a need to discuss this as long as noone needs it because all this in only theoretically - is it?. If you have a concrete idea about another setup not related to DNS where Anycast is very helpful or needed, feel free to create another policy proposal which deals with it. If you only want to "try to deploy" like you write, there is http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv4-policies.html#8 and http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments already. One can play with that and develop requirements for a new Anycast policy based on the results. ...my 0.02EUR - please don't shoot me if i forgot about some shiny new Anycast solution for some technique that actually already exists -- ======================================================================== = Sascha Lenz SLZ-RIPE slz at baycix.de = = Network Operations = = BayCIX GmbH, Landshut * PGP public Key on demand * = ========================================================================
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]