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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Michael,

On 10.05.2007 11:09, michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
> Why should address policy be so tightly tied to the technical details of
> the DNS protocol and its implementation?
> 
> Are you saying that IPv4 Anycast is only justified if the application is
> DNS hosting and the number of separate zones (presumably you count SOA
> records) goes over a certain limit?
> 
> No other application is justified?

The reason is that there has been the need of an Anycast Assignment by
the DNS people, and when asking the community what other services using
currently anycast noone stood up. So the policy was made in regards to
the DNS. At least that's the story as far as I remember.

Additionally, the policy would not have reached consensus if it would
have been open to all anycasting services.

> Only the organization hosting the DNS is eligible, i.e. a data centre
> operator who wants to provide hosting services is not eligible?

Not even with the existing policy.

> Every DNS hoster with over x zones gets their own /24 even though you
> could aggregate over 200 such organizations into one /24 if they shared
> data centre infrastructure?
> 
> It seems to me that this approach to IPv4 Anycast prefixes only
> reinforces an existing monopoly and blocks organizations who might want
> to take a fresh approach to DNS hosting or other types of application
> hosting.

As it was said here in the Address Policy WG session at the RIPE
Meeting, for v4 this may become obsolete when the policy reaches
consensus that set the PI assignment size to a /24 minimum generally. v6
then still remains as unsolved.


Tobias

- --
Tobias Cremer M.A.
IP Admin Engineer

Cable & Wireless Telecommunication Services GmbH
Landsbergerstr. 155     80687 Muenchen  Germany
Tel +49 89 926 99 0 --  FAX +49 89 926 99 180  -- COMNET 7 49 9169

Geschäftsführer Francois Goreux, Richard Pennal
Amtsgericht München HRB 146 617
www.cw.com/de

- -- Every message GnuPG signed --
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGQvnrhC6y11CNwvcRArtXAJ43WNgEuPWuJjp8mbz5EW/wrRuBFwCg4T/n
U4zgdj7J5YNbKs+t4V9Ztsg=
=Ck2T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----