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
Wed Jun 13 00:21:39 CEST 2007
Andy Davidson schrieb: > > On 12 Jun 2007, at 22:54, Sascha Lenz wrote: > >> Andy Davidson wrote: >>> 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 ? >> 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. > > Actually my customer wants to try to anycast streaming audio media. It > seems to work in the lab, We want to deploy in the wild now. that still sounds like an experiment for a new protocol - then follow my suggestion - get them an experiemental assignment. If it works out, suggest a policy. There is no real "legal" way to help you out with the current policies. I don't assume you can justify >250 IPs to get the customer a valid, internet-routable /24-or-smaller assignment (neither PA nor PI since the rules apply to both), and since i strongly hope that it is safe to assume that your customer also developed that for IPv6, you're busted here in any way (no PI assigments in RIPE-land, an additional /48 PA just for that probably not justifyable and probably not really routable worldwide...). OTOH - If you can justify all that amount of address space according to the current policies, you don't have a problem, since the RIRs are not about routing. You don't need their consent to deploy anycast. You just need to follow the policies to get the address space you need. In case of Anycast-DNS the problem is, that you usually only need two IPs - the DNS server and a gateway, which doesn't justify more than a /30 or so :-) Hence, the special policy for Anycast DNS. Due to lack of any real information i'd say ==> Experiment, in my eyes. -- ======================================================================== = 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 ]