[address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jørgen Hovland
jorgen at hovland.cx
Wed Aug 8 13:36:59 CEST 2007
-----Original Message----- From: Greg L. [mailto:bgp2 at linuxadmin.org] >Thanks for your response. >Who needs a new /24 PI if you are only going to implement DNS anycast in your own network? Why do you need anycast DNS? Suggestions: * To scale (and keep 100% uptime) * DDoS prevention/reduction of weaknesses The scaling problem has already been solved in my previous email. To take down all of your nameservers, the best way would probably be to generate a lot of DNS queries. But then we are back at the scaling problem which has already been solved. So what is the real problem? Cheers, j
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]