Re: DNS anycast considered harmful (was: .ORG problems this evening)

["Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve () telecomplete co uk>]

> : > There's an easy fix to that particular situation:  Make the first (or first
> : > two) listed servers anycast, and the rest unicast.
> :
> : It would require a central management (or at least a central
> : oversight) of the root name servers and I do not believe there is one:
> : each root name server anycasts at will, without a leader saying ("A
> : and B will anycast, the others will stay unicast").
>
> Well, that's something for the root server operators to think about and
> discuss amongst themselves.  I know several of them are reading this list,
> and may be reading this thread.  8-)

Plus, A is verisign so any hopes of cluefulness or working for the community are 
fading fast!

> Still doesn't help .ORG, which is 100% anycast and thus has no DNS-based
> redundancy (see my experience elsewhere in this thread).

It does - there are two! Yuo just mean less than 13 as per the root.

What is the maximum number you can fit in a single NS reply for a 3 letter tld 
such as .com/.org ? (Is it still 13? I'm not familiar with the DNS protocol at 
that level)

Steve