[136334] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: quietly....
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Israel)
Wed Feb 2 11:16:59 2011
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 11:14:04 -0500
From: Dave Israel <davei@otd.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <70C15FD9-CF85-4664-B913-3EBE4271C7F5@muada.com>
X-otd-MailScanner-From: davei@otd.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2/2/2011 10:52 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> No, the point is that DNS resolvers in different places all use the same addresses. So at the cyber cafe 3003::3003 is the cyber cafe DNS but at the airport 3003::3003 is the airport DNS. (Or in both cases, if they don't run a DNS server, one operated by their ISP.)
>
> I understand people use DHCP for lots of stuff today. But that's mainly because DHCP is there, not because it's the best possible way to get that particular job done.
So what if I want to assign different people to different resolvers by
policy? What if I want to use non-/64 subnets with a resolver on each
one? What if I round-robin amongst more or less resolvers than there
are well-known addresses assigned to? What if, in 1/2/5/10/20/50 years,
we need to do things differently? Why intentionally burden a protocol
with something that screams "I am going to be a depreciated legacy
problem someday!"
-Dave
