[address-policy-wg] PI for Not-DNS Anycast.

At 04:36 2007.08.08.÷, Jørgen Hovland wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Greg L. [mailto:bgp2 at linuxadmin.org]
>
>
> >Thanks for your response.
> >Who needs a new /24 PI if you are only going to implement DNS anycast in
>your own network?
>
>Why do you need anycast DNS?
>Suggestions:
>
>* To scale (and keep 100% uptime)
>* DDoS prevention/reduction of weaknesses
>
>
>The scaling problem has already been solved in my previous email.
>
>To take down all of your nameservers, the best way would probably be to 
>generate a lot of DNS queries. But then we are back at the scaling problem 
>which has already been solved. So what is the real problem?


To speed up DNS queries for their customers and clients.
If I was running DNS hosting service I would prefer to have Australian 
visitors querying DNS boxes in Australia. Clients from Germany querying 
anycast node in Germany. And if I was in Romania, all local clients to 
"hit" DNS anycast IP in Romania. Why should only ccTLD's and some large 
LIR's allowed to lower the service query latency for DNS traffic and 
sometimes cut the bandwidth bills?

ccTLD service should be NOT the only exception to get /24 PI for anycast 
DNS, the policy should be open for any business entity that can demonstrate 
the need for /24 PI DNS anycast allocation and  2+ disperse locations where 
this prefix is announced.


Greg