>> In the anycast model, you're at the mercy of the system that's
>> maintaining the anycast route: you can't query directly to find out
>> where the DNS server is, you have to wait for the routing system to
>> figure it out, and the routing system doesn't tell you when it change
>> the binding between a particular anycast address and the server behind
>> it, so you can't usefully keep track of which DNS servers have been
>> misbehaving recently.
>
>Actually that is an incorrect statement. The IPv6 addressing
>architecture forbids the use of an anycast address as the source
>address. So, the response back from the anycast member will have
>one of its unicast addresses as the source address. So, it is
>similar to your multicast request/unicast response model.
more on the "anycast" topic can be found in
draft-ietf-ipngwg-resv-anycast-02.txt.
i start feeling that ietf process is taking too much time for vendors.
if we don't standardize DNS server discovery mechanism, some vendor
will ship products with DNS server address preconfigured to some
address the vendor has. it is the easiest solution if we can assume
that there's only one DNS infrastructure.
(like MacOS X shipped with NTP server configured to "time.apple.com")
itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
