Hi, let me clarify a few things: On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 12:19:32PM +0200, Joao Damas wrote: [..]
Good up to here.
. This is meant as kind of guidance - "deploy one set, and if that's well understood and you want to deploy another set, feel free to come back".
the "come back" part spoils it. Some people already understand this pretty well, no need for a several step ballet.
Maybe the wording wasn't too clear here. I don't want to imply "you MUST deploy one anycast set first, and then wait 3 months, and then come back for the second anycast set" (and it's not in the proposal text either). This is just the way I had envisioned it to happen "in the general case". [..]
Along that lines, there has been some confusion about redundancy. An important clarification is that it's not expected to put *all* nameservers into the (single) anycast prefix, but have "unicast" servers and one (or "few") anycast sets. So if the anycast prefix is unavailable from some networks, clients will fall back to one of the unicast servers.
This could be the subject for a BCP sort of document by the DNS wg, but it has no place in an IP allocation policy.
Which is exactly why it's not in the proposed text. It's just there to explain "background thoughts" - and I agree that a DNS wg BCP document would be a good place to write it down. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 60210 (58081) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299