[76564] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: verizon.net and other email grief
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
Thu Dec 16 08:28:25 2004
In-Reply-To: <20041216115219.GA446@reifa-wave.karrenberg.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@merit.edu>
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:27:52 +0100
To: Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg@ripe.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 16-dec-04, at 12:52, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>> That's definitely true, though it can be used successfully -- if
>> there's a
>> very reliable kill-switch to withdraw the advertisement in a moment,
>> or some
>> kind of fallback mechanism in place to handle gross failures.
> Using this as the *only* remedy for unavailability of an anycast
> instance
> is insufficient given the speed at which bad news travels in BGP. You
> want
> to have the service available at multiple addresses with each of those
> engineered as differently as possible.
And that's exactly why UltraDNS' treatment of .org is evil. I really
don't understand why people with .org domains aren't complaining louder
about this.
There are also other risks associated with anycast. See discussions on
the IETF list earlier this year: about anycast + per packet load
balancing ("[dnsop] Re: Root Anycast (fwd)", early october) and about
root anycast ("13 Root Server Limitation", may).
