I don't think gtld-servers.net uses anycast; someone correct me
if I'm wrong. F-root != gtld-servers.net.
perhaps on two counts...
) the gtld-servers.net machines are anycast.
) F is not unique, they are just a whole lot more vocal
about their anycasting.
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 13:40:56 +
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
perhaps on two counts...
) the gtld-servers.net machines are anycast.
) F is not unique, they are just a whole lot more vocal
about their anycasting.
You're not the only one to correct me and say gtld
On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 04:14:30PM +, Edward B. Dreger wrote:
You're not the only one to correct me and say gtld _is_ anycast.
How many of the roots are? I thought there was one besides F,
but didn't think it was that many...
At least C, I, J, K, M (http://www.root-servers.org/)
On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 12:31:01PM -0400, Rob Payne wrote:
On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 04:14:30PM +, Edward B. Dreger wrote:
You're not the only one to correct me and say gtld _is_ anycast.
How many of the roots are? I thought there was one besides F,
but didn't think it was that
How many of the roots are? I thought there was one besides F,
but didn't think it was that many...
At least C, I, J, K, M (http://www.root-servers.org/)
And G, I believe. That's at least eight of the thirteen.
-Bill
On Jul 2, 2:48pm, Jeff Wasilko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 02:38:12PM -0400, Patrick W Gilmore wrote:
run .org, I just think a blanket statement anycast is bad is, well,
bad.)
I'd be totally happy to see a combination, too. It's just pretty
obvious that the current
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Jeff Wasilko wrote:
Can't we just go back to non-anycast, please?
Uh, how much additional down-time did you want? Rolling the clock back a
decade isn't going to make things _better_.
-Bill
PGB Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 11:28:10 +0100
PGB From: Per Gregers Bilse
PGB At least the previous outage (a couple of weeks ago) had
PGB nothing to do with anycast, I was getting NXDOMAIN replies
PGB back, and no kind of fallback or non-anycast deployment
PGB would have helped.
Moreover, it would
JW Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 11:22:34 -0400
JW From: Jeff Wasilko
JW On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 06:45:44AM -0700, Bill Woodcock wrote:
JW
JW Uh, how much additional down-time did you want? Rolling
JW the clock back a decade isn't going to make things
JW _better_.
JW
JW Why do you say that?
JW
JW
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 11:12:31PM -0400, Joe Maimon wrote:
Come to think about it, there was a thread here a while back about this
very thing. root server robustness and all that.
What number/timeframe reported .org hiccup does this make?
It's at least the 2nd. Last big one was
On Jul 2, 2004, at 2:32 PM, Jeff Wasilko wrote:
Can't we just go back to non-anycast, please?
You mean like the roots Er, wait a second
Now, if you suggest a combination, that might be reasonable. (I don't
run .org, I just think a blanket statement anycast is bad is, well,
bad.)
--
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 02:38:12PM -0400, Patrick W Gilmore wrote:
On Jul 2, 2004, at 2:32 PM, Jeff Wasilko wrote:
Can't we just go back to non-anycast, please?
You mean like the roots Er, wait a second
Now, if you suggest a combination, that might be reasonable. (I don't
I guess I'll ask first...
--
Richard A Steenbergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
I guess I'll ask first...
maybe they had some whacky attack like Akamai got? I'll have to troll the
nanog archives for the info on finding which/where/what .org TLD box you
are querying when there are problems. Rodney had noted that such info
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
maybe they had some whacky attack like Akamai got? I'll have to troll the
nanog archives for the info on finding which/where/what .org TLD box you
are querying when there are problems. Rodney had noted that such info is
helpful for them to
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, Tim Wilde wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
maybe they had some whacky attack like Akamai got? I'll have to troll the
nanog archives for the info on finding which/where/what .org TLD box you
are querying when there are problems. Rodney had
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
I guess I'll ask first...
There was a gentleman a while back that posited that having only two
anycast NS records was broken by design. Suggested that while servicing
the whole TLD from two NS that were really a little army of anycast
clusters all around out
On Jul 1, 2004, at 8:12 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
There was a gentleman a while back that posited that having only two
anycast NS records was broken by design.
It's the mother of SPOFs. (when your anti-spof solution has an spof...)
Something about eggs all in one basket. The basket being the anycast
18 matches
Mail list logo
