in the vein of 'new deployment folks may want to shortcut all of the
bad lessons everyone else learned'
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> So the question to ask is, do we have a good reason to strongly
> encourage all new Anycast deployments to be in this model, as opposed t
In a message written on Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 03:04:03PM -0500, John Kristoff
wrote:
> It seems to me this is VeriSign trying to document a BCP that works for
> them and may work for others. So perhaps it is just the BCP status
> that is disconcerting?
That may be part of it. At the risk of offe
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 19:07:06 +
Leo Bicknell wrote:
> time. I think the question is if anyone else on the list cares one
> way or another, because if no other opinions have been changed we
> might as well stop.
I often play contrarian or skeptic, if not an honest critic when I take
the time t
jumping in in the middle...
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:22:45AM -0400, Danny
> McPherson wrote:
>> With normal unicast there's a single tree for the prefix in the routing
>> system, while anycasting inherently introduces
In a message written on Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:22:45AM -0400, Danny McPherson
wrote:
> With normal unicast there's a single tree for the prefix in the routing
> system, while anycasting inherently introduces a polytree for the prefix.
> However, anycasting with a common origin AS creates a 'ps
On Sep 29, 2011, at 9:35 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>
> Ok, fair enough. So let's ask the direct question:
>
> Would it not be even better then for them to have a unique origin
> ASN, and publish the list of paths that originate the route,
> achieving the same result without needing to have an
In a message written on Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 09:27:57AM -0400, Danny McPherson
wrote:
> I never said "does not require any pre-knowledge". As a matter of fact,
> what I said, and what the draft says, is that with unique origins the
> services operator _could publish in a well-known location a
On Sep 29, 2011, at 9:06 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>
> Seriously, show me an algorythm to find a leak for a Anycast service
> that does not require any pre-knowledge about how the Anycast service is
> configured. I submit such a thing does not exist.
I never said "does not require any pre-knowled
In a message written on Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 09:35:55PM -0400, Danny McPherson
wrote:
> Simply put, if detection or policies can't be defined (discriminated)
> based on authorized origin and a single upstream adjacent AS alone then
> adjacent ASes and upstreams need to be codified. If the origi
