[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 ]
Iljitsch van Beijnum
iljitsch at muada.com
Thu Mar 24 14:29:21 CET 2005
On 24-mrt-05, at 14:05, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > I don't see from where you take the right to decide for a TLD registry > how they should run their operations. The same place they find the right to take up space in my routing table. > Apart from that, I can tell you that these shorter RTTs make a hell > of a difference. Then you're running the wrong DNS software. A good resolving server should keep track of the TTLs towards different nameservers for a zone and try to talk to the one with the lowest TTL first most of the time. From your other message: > There is, however, a difference between routing table pollution (mostly > because of missing or failing aggregation) and small prefixes in the > routing table due to "special" PI service blocks. One should not mix > this. It's natural to look at these differently, but the end result is invariably the same: more CPU and memory usage in the routers.
- 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 ]