[address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Joao Damas
joao-ripe at c-l-i.net
Thu Mar 24 15:43:37 CET 2005
On 24 Mar, 2005, at 15:36, Randy Bush wrote: > mornin' joao, > >>>> OK, so I guess my point altogether is that I dislike special-ness. >>>> There seems to be agreement that DNS anycasting is here to stay >>> and it's special enough to require special policy. i.e. one does >>> not have to like consistency to dislike specialness. >> one tries to limit it to the minimum. > > so, in this case, would that be > o only tlds can get this specialness > o only dns services can get this specialness > o any anycasting services can get this specialness > o any services which can justify address space get the space > (which is what we theoretically have today)? > Dunno, you will have to ask the wg. What is your take on it? On a separate issue, your 3rd bullet point: are there any more results from your study on the routing of anycasted services? Some people are telling they are OK with using anycast for TCP and I am certainly curious. Joao
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]