[122431] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: History of 4.2.2.2. What's the story?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Scott Howard)
Sun Feb 14 17:48:41 2010
In-Reply-To: <201002142217.o1EMHCi8071152@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:46:08 -0800
From: Scott Howard <scott@doc.net.au>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
> I don't care what internal routing tricks are used, they are still
> under the *one* external route and as such subject to single points
> of failure and as such don't have enough independence.
Where has Level 3 ever claimed that these servers were ever for *external* use?
As a Level 3 customer who uses these servers, I'm seeing multiple
*internal* routes to these servers.
Of course, if 4/8 disappears from the global routing tables then Level
3 has a bit bigger problem than their DNS resolvers not being
accessible from non-customers.
I'd also be interested in knowing where you consider the "single
points of failure" for their announcement of 4/8 is, but that's
probably for another thread...
Scott.
