Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] AnyCast assignments - Update

McTim dogwallah at
Fri Nov 28 11:56:54 UTC 2014

sure, I am all for future proofing as APB suggests.

I don't think that there is groounds for confusion, but I would support the
change that Alan suggests in the interests of clarity.



On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Alan Barrett <apb at> wrote:

> 2. Summary of how this proposal addresses the problem
>> This proposal allows the use of:
>> a. One (1) /24 of IPv4 for anycast services from a PA allocation of
>> an LIR or direct end-user assignment.
>> b. One /48 of IPv6 for anycast services from an IPv6 LIR allocation
>> or direct end-user assignment.
>> c. An AS Number for anycast purposes.
> Clause 2 appears to require the applicant to use all three of the IPv4,
> IPv6, and ASN.  However, under clause 3, it uses "and/or" to allow the
> applicant to choose any subset of those three items.  I think this
> should be clarified, possibly by the use of words like this in the first
> sentence of clause 2:
>   2. This proposal allows the use of any one or more of the following:
> It's also not clear whether the restriction to "one" IPv4 /24, IPv6
> /48, or ASN, means only one forever, or one per application (with the
> freedom to apply for another one later).  I'd prefer to allow the use of
> multiple such subnets or ASNs, if the applicant is providing multiple
> anycast services and has adequate justification for not placing them all
> in the same subnet or ASN.
> I'd also like this proposal to be usable for any kind of anycast, even
> those not invented yet.
> --apb (Alan Barrett)
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list