[136349] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: quietly....
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matt Addison)
Wed Feb 2 12:43:38 2011
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102021226290.54349@murf.icantclick.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 12:43:26 -0500
From: Matt Addison <matt.addison@lists.evilgeni.us>
To: david raistrick <drais@icantclick.org>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:28, david raistrick <drais@icantclick.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2011, 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.)
>>
>
> Because no one has ever had a need to coexist with other DNS servers on the
> same subnet, right? After all, there should only ever be 1 authorative
> source of information, and there's no way we would ever want to have an
> exception for that.
>
Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? What's wrong with having default
well known (potentially anycasted) resolver addresses, which can then be
overridden by RA/DHCP/static configuration?
~Matt
