>(http://www.circleid.com/posts/20141107_secure_unowned_hierarchical_anycast_root_name_service_and_apologia/)
As I understand it, the proposal is to add another root server, the "X" root, with A and AAAA records pointing at addresses that will never be globally routed, with an invitation to networks of whatever size to provide a root running on those addresses visible to hosts on their own network. Other than "it would be wrong", what's the practical difference between that and just running your own server at the addresses of, say, the B root? The routes should only be in your own network, and shouldn't be exported to anyone else, so if BGP signatures make other people reject your route, that's a feature. This hack of course has the advantage that you can do it right now. R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
