[73794] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: RIPE "Golden Networks" Document ID - 229/210/178
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stephen J. Wilcox)
Fri Sep 3 13:49:12 2004
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 18:46:26 +0100 (BST)
From: "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve@telecomplete.co.uk>
To: Rodney Joffe <rjoffe@centergate.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <84BF057B-FD2F-11D8-B99F-000A95BD713E@centergate.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Rodney Joffe wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2004, at 2:58 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> >> If you don't implement ripe-229, why not?
> >
> > because the golden address space stuff is stupid
> >
>
> OK. I'll bite...
>
> Given Network A, which has "golden network" content behind it as described by
> the RIPE paper (root and tld data), if the network has some combination of
> events that result in all of their announcements to you being dampened by you,
> your users can't get "there". For grin's, let's say we're talking about .foo,
> one of the larger gtld's.
But .foo is announced from 13 IPs globally, allowing for anycast probably 40
nodes. If gtld-A has an incident it may be a good thing to dampen it from the
internet as it may not be reachable, the other 12 gtlds will be able to serve
responses in a stable manner.
Unless you're suggesting *all* the gtlds are flapping at once?
Steve
