TJ wrote:
WRT Anycast DNS; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using prefix:::1
FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill.
I think for very
WRT Anycast DNS; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using prefix:::1
FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill.
I think for very small/small networks anycast
On Oct 23, 2009, at 5:45 AM, TJ wrote:
WRT Anycast DNS; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation
and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using
prefix:::1
FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill.
Once upon a time, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com said:
Please remember that IPv6 DNS is OFTEN not stateless as the replies
are commonly too large for UDP.
Anything that supports IPv6 _should_ also support EDNS0.
--
Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet
I think for very small/small networks anycast requires a lot of overhead
and understanding. If your big enough to do anycast and/or loadbalancing
it's not hard for you to put all three addresses onto one device.
Anycast isn't really hard - same address, multiple places, routers see
WRT Anycast DNS; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using prefix:::1
FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill.
I personally would suggest getting a well known
6 matches
Mail list logo
