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

[rpd] AnyCast assignments - Update

ALAIN AINA aalain at
Tue Dec 9 11:56:41 UTC 2014


The policy should follow new BCPs( which update, replace old ones) without going through PDP unless we have reasons to do otherwise. 

Policies must define rules on the targets  and how to justify the needs.  These two BCPs describe current best way of using the resources for global anycast services.  Either we add the requirements  in the policy or we refer to the BCP. I support the last option.

RFC2026  section 5 says

 The BCP subseries of the RFC series is designed to be a way to
 standardize practices and the results of community deliberations.  A
 BCP document is subject to the same basic set of procedures as
 standards track documents and thus is a vehicle by which the IETF
 community can define and ratify the community's best current thinking
 on a statement of principle or on what is believed to be the best way
  to perform some operations or IETF process function.

Hope this helps


On Dec 9, 2014, at 8:24 AM, Alan Barrett wrote:

> On Mon, 08 Dec 2014, ALAIN AINA wrote:
>> Yes. What's about :
>> This proposal allows an organization to receive an IPv4/IPv6 allocation or assignment and/or an AS Number purely for anycast or GPRS Roaming Exchange (GRX) usage in line with the provisions of BCP126 and BCP169 respectively.
> What do we want to happen when BCP126 or BCP169 are updated, replaced, or obsoleted?  Do we want the relevant Afrinic policy to automatically follow the new BCP without needing to go through the Afrinic policy development process, or do we want the Afrinic policy to keep following the old BCP, until a policy update is passed through the PDP?
> --apb (Alan Barrett)
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at

More information about the RPD mailing list