[dns-wg] More anchors involved in DNSMON measurements

Hi Robert,

> For consistency reasons we're trying to involve the same set of anchors for
> monitoring each zone. This will probably not scale forever, but we'll try to
> do this as long as we can.

sounds good.

> Earlier we've heard from operators that they'd appreciate if we used a wider
> set of anchors, eg. add more from outside the EU. So this time we added the
> following:

[...]

indeed, making the measurements less Euro centric is appreciated.

> Indeed some anchors are more stable than others. That's not a new
> phenomenon, I believe it happened to TTM boxes as well. As for what to do
> with anchors that consistently fail or are down for along time: we don't
> have a policy defined yet. I'd expect that if a particular anchor proves to
> be useless for this purpose, then we'll remove it from the pool. (But, after

Well, if an anchor becomes unstable in some sense, it's probably useless
for the whole project?  My question was more aiming at the stability of the
set of anchors as such rather than the operational stability of individual
anchors.

Thanks for the clarifications.

-Peter