William Herrin wrote:
The long version is at
http://bill.herrin.us/network/trrp-implementation.html . If you have
comments along the lines of, "Where did X come from that you first
mentioned here," or "What advantage does this individual get from
doing the action you state there?" I'd like to hear them. If there is
any step which doesn't represent a realistic possibility given the
ones before then I need to do more work on it.
There's a few big gotchas, for sure:
Phase 5 stick - many/most TLD DNS servers are anycast in IPv6, with PI
/48's. (I know because it is my day job :-))
So, filtering *those* is going to be a non-starter. Circular
dependencies are bad, especially if they are DNS.
The requirement on DNS involving UDP might not fly - what about servers
doing TCP only, or those with large RR sets?
What about EDNS0? DNSSEC? All of these are non-trivial, if TRRP relies
on DNS.
Then there is the big question about the "first" ITR. Who gets that
contract, and what are the terms?
What happens if that party turns out to be another SCO? Or gets bought
by MS or one of their stooges?
Remember, for the first while, the ITR operator will be a monopoly, and
how they behave has a huge impact
on the long-term success of TRRP, as well as possibly the ability for
other parties to operate ITRs.
Brian
--
to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
