gert@space.net (Gert Doering) wrote:
There is no special case policy for (unicast) ccTLD name servers, for major search engines, big software vendor download sites, etc. -> find an upstream provider, get an IPv6 address block, and enter that in the relevant DNS zones.
I'm not talking unicast, I'm talking of not having a chance to get an assignment for ccTLD DNS servers. And yes, they would be anycast, for packet size reasons (even if that isn't the issue here; count the Verisign special assignments). Our home v6 network is a PA /48 (you of all should know) which I cannot properly multihome. Fortunately, that's not a problem, even if some people are filtering it. The real problem is DNS deployment in v6. v4 has 11 (14 by June) of our servers, spread world-wide; I'd like to do the same with v6 servers, but I simply can't. Every f***ing registry on the planet has the special assignment policy (with very strict rules, mind you), except for the one they always send me back to ("sorry, not our business, you're in the RIPE region").
Of course the underlying question returns to "how to do IPv6 multihoming for A Special End Site".
I know, and I am getting sick of the process not getting one step further. I don't know where the problem really is, but the only way to get one or a couple /48s for anycasting seems to open business in the USA. Or Zaire. Or New Zealand. So one of the registries that long have this kind of policy consider me their business. I don't know why the RIPE community doesn't even publish the papers that are being circulated and have been for over a year now. Is everybody busy waiting for the IETF v6-multihoming group to come to a conclusion? Elmar. -- "Begehe nur nicht den Fehler, Meinung durch Sachverstand zu substituieren." (PLemken, <bu6o7e$e6v0p$2@ID-31.news.uni-berlin.de>) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---