Fwd: [address-policy-wg] 2007-02 New Policy Proposal (Change in IP Assignments for Anycasting DNS Policy)

* Johann Gutauer <jgutauer at cw.net> [2007-05-10 15:30]:
> > No, I don't say that. I'm not happy with these "numerical"
> > requirements. But I'm *more* happy with the SOA count (in our case)
> > then the 512 byte limit.
> 
> Everyone can create as many SOA-records as necessary. I don't think that this is a good idea to
> count the number of hosted domains. I've even seen customers which generate a subdomain for each
> A-record.

You would have to restrict that to 1st-level domains to be effective,
but there would surely be cases where this would exclude people who
have a valid reason for anycast.

At the moment the "physical location" requirement seems to be the one
which covers most of the valid anycast setups, if I'm not mistaken?

> The 512 byte limit is hard to prove but it's for protocol reasons.
> Nevertheless, does it still make sense?

I don't think it still makes sense. It doesn't cover for example
(D)DoS, which is something you can fend of with anycast.


Regards,

Sebastian

-- 
InterNetX GmbH
Maximilianstr. 6
93047 Regensburg
Germany

Tel. +49 941 59559-480
Fax  +49 941 59579-051

Geschäftsführer/CEO: Thomas Mörz
Amtsgericht Regensburg, HRB 7142

nic-hdl         : SW1421-RIPE
GPG-Key         : 0x97F5A1D8 (0x8431335F97F5A1D8)
GPG-Fingerprint : 6181 B041 3554 0B6F 4EF3  1B12 8431 335F 97F5 A1D8