--- ra...@psg.com wrote:
lots of good research lit on catchment topology of anycasted
dns, which is very non-local.
---
For the others here that didn't know what that is and are
curious. I couldn't take it and just had to know... :)
https://tools.ietf.org/ht
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 1:10 AM Bill Woodcock wrote:
> > On Nov 14, 2019, at 7:39 AM, Anoop Ghanwani
wrote:
> > RFC 7094 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7094) describes the pitfalls &
risks of using TCP with an anycast address. It recognizes that there are
valid use cases for it, though.
> > Spe
>>> RFC 7094 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7094) describes the pitfalls
>>> & risks of using TCP with an anycast address.
>>
>> and two decades of operational experience are that prudent deployments
>> just work.
>
> I agree with Bill/Randy here... this does just work if you understand
> your lo
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 1:54 AM Randy Bush wrote:
>
> > RFC 7094 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7094) describes the pitfalls
> > & risks of using TCP with an anycast address.
>
> and two decades of operational experience are that prudent deployments
> just work.
I agree with Bill/Randy here... t
> RFC 7094 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7094) describes the pitfalls
> & risks of using TCP with an anycast address.
and two decades of operational experience are that prudent deployments
just work.
randy
> On Nov 14, 2019, at 7:39 AM, Anoop Ghanwani wrote:
> RFC 7094 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7094) describes the pitfalls & risks
> of using TCP with an anycast address. It recognizes that there are valid use
> cases for it, though.
> Specifically, section 3.1 says this:
>Most statefu
RFC 7094 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7094) describes the pitfalls &
risks of using TCP with an anycast address. It recognizes that there are
valid use cases for it, though.
Specifically, section 3.1 says this:
>>>
Most stateful transport protocols (e.g., TCP), without modification,
do
7 matches
Mail list logo
