[rpd] AnyCast assignments - Update

[ALAIN AINA]

Hi,

On Dec 7, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Mark Elkins wrote:

> 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???

I don't think so.

Our common goals are:

1- Make policies clear for both implementor and requesters
2- Minimize the risks of abuse

So references to best practices is good.  In this case one for the v4/v6 and one for ASN

Ressources must be used on need basis and with trust. Best practices changes over time and implementer shall adjust 

Thanks

--Alain


> 
>> --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
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd