On Jan 26, 2014, at 8:26 PM, Hannigan, Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> That and isn't the IETF the right venue to carve out a specific from a /8? 
> This is in effect global policy, isn't it?

I suppose APNIC could throw it back to IANA (maybe? not sure how an RIR can 
throw a /24 back to IANA -- perhaps that needs a global policy too?) who could, 
after a couple of years after a global policy is established, put that prefix 
into the IPv4 special registry.

However, in the meantime, is there a problem with APNIC declaring it "anycast 
to support DNS infrastructure" now?

> On Jan 25, 2014, at 8:24 PM, Randy Bush <[email protected]> wrote:
>> and why won't this leak and make confusion?

You mean more than it is leaking and causing confusion now?

Regards,
-drc

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to