[rpd] AnyCast assignments - Update

[Mark Elkins]

On Sun, 2014-12-07 at 08:37 +0000, ALAIN AINA wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> As discussed at the meeting, using multiple subnets is ok as far as reference to BCP126 is in there. 
> 
> To add Multiple ASNs on this, i suggest, reference to BCP 169

I dislike tying a policy unnecessarily to other external references - in
case they (the external policies) change.


I believe the trigger to being provided with an ASN for Multi-casting
purposes is IP address space - and as such that is already covered by
BCP126???


> --Alain
> On Dec 3, 2014, at 5:31 AM, David Peall wrote:
> 
> > 
> >> On Nov 28, 2014, at 13:26, Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com> 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)
> >> _______________________________________________
> > 
> > I support the policy and APB’s suggestions but would also suggest allowing slightly larger allocations like /23 or /22 to allow the use of routing tools that Frank has already suggested.
> > 
> > Regards
> > —
> > David Peall_______________________________________________

-- 
Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5810 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20141207/4fac11ef/attachment.bin>