[address-policy-wg] Policy Change Request - Allow address allocations for anycast DNS operation

Don't you think the policy ought to be more relaxed and allow the 
server manager for the zone to decide how many of their servers they 
want to anycast?

Joao

On 11 Jun, 2004, at 10:25, Gert Doering wrote:

> Hi Pekka,
>
> I'm answering on your e-mail, but the same issue has appeared a couple
> of times:
>
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 12:38:45PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote:
>>> One /24 per zone operator. [..]
>>
>> This is unacceptable for redundancy reasons.  If the routing for the
>> /24 hiccups (e.g., someone advertises the prefix but drops the
>> packets), all the nameservers will down for people behind that ISP?
>> If you anycast something, there will have to be a backup option as
>> well.
>
> The idea is not to put *all* name servers for a given zone into anycast
> space.  The idea is to have a number of unicast servers (as many as
> fit into the delegation UDP packet, minus 1) and in addition to that,
> an anycast server with "many instances".
>
> So if the anycast /24 hickups, the client resolver will treat this as
> it will treat any failure of one of the auth DNS servers -> fall over
> to the next nameserver listed.
>
> Of course it's open to debate whether it might be desireable to permit
> "many different anycast networks for a single zone", or even "anycast
> all of the servers" (with individual networks).  The current idea is
> conservative and proposes "one anycast netblock".
>
> Gert Doering
>         -- NetMaster
> -- 
> Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  60210  
> (58081)
>
> SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
> 80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299
>