In message <10be7b64-46ff-46d8-a428-268897413...@hopcount.ca>, Joe Abley writes : > On 2010-02-14, at 17:17, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > I don't care what internal routing tricks are used, they are still > > under the *one* external route and as such subject to single points > > of failure and as such don't have enough independence. > > Are you asserting architectural control over what Level3 decide to do = > with their own servers, Mark? :-)
No. The reason for multiple nameservers is to remove single points of failures. Using three consecutive addresses doesn't remove single points of failure in the routing system. > If their goal is distribute a service for the benefit of their own = > customers, then keeping all anycast nodes associated with that service = > on-net seems entirely sensible. Which only helps if *all* customers of those servers are also on net. > Joe -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
