[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It is easy to accidently introduce single points of failure
> into anycast solutions even though you have topologically
> spread your nameservers. It much harder to do this with
> a non-anycast solution.
Agree completely. Anycast can work well when (1) you control the
end-points and (2) you control the netblock. The current proposal leaves
those elements under somebody else' control ('default' configs that use
hard-coded addresses which follow competing route advertisementss).
> WKA doesn't remove the need to have another solution to
> supply the search list.
I don't see that as a problem for the 'default' service since the data in
question is particular to each administrative domain, and therefore has to
be configured explicitly on a per-site basis. So for that particular data,
the admin either has to config the host anyway, or the admin should be
looking towards making a management investment in DHCP or whatever suits
their needs. But for a 'default' service that just needs to be able to
resolve basic FQDNs, being able to have resolvers locate functional
servers automagically is good enough, and is a reasonable scope.
--
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
