[address-policy-wg] 2007-02 New Policy Proposal (Change in IP Assignments for Anycasting DNS Policy)

Hi Heather,

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: heather skanks < <mailto:heather.skanks at gmail.com>  heather.skanks at gmail.com>
Date: May 9, 2007 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2007-02 New Policy Proposal (Change in IP Assignments for Anycasting DNS Policy)
To: Gert Doering < <mailto:gert at space.net>  gert at space.net>

> Why the assumptaion that anycast requires PI space in the first place?



I agree, and I already mentioned this 2 years ago:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/address-policy-wg/2005/msg01079.html

 

 

The 8 ip-address limit only limits actual locations you can place your nameservers at. So 8 locations/different ISPs is with todays standard more than enough?

At those 8 locations you can at each configure 80 network load balancing servers causing a total capacity of ~13 million queries per second with old hardware and bad dns software.

 

There is no such thing as “critical internet infrastructure”. The internet is never stronger than its weakest link. If that is ccTLD nameservers... okay.

(This whole anycast problem only concerns nameservers with very few but extremely large zones. The others can just spread them into different nameservers)

 

 

 

 

Cheers,

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20070509/7dc32f9b/attachment.html>