[dns-operations] Anycast vs. unicast NS
jim at rfc1035.com
Sun Mar 20 21:07:00 UTC 2011
On 20 Mar 2011, at 20:03, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> On Mar 20, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Jim Reid wrote:
>> Extra complexity in server configuration
>> More complicated systems & network management (procedures)
>> More complicated monitoring arrangements
>> More elaborate network operations and support (procedures)
> Aren't all of these differences dependent on the number of servers,
> rather than whether they're anycast or unicast?
No Bill. I was/am specifically referring to the special sauce that
goes on inside an anycast node and then to assimilate that node into
the anycast cloud. I hoped that was clear from my previous posting. Oh
There are additional failure modes here that aren't found at a unicast
server, all other things being equal. I'd be very surprised if PCH
configures and operates its anycast DNS servers compared in *exactly*
the same way as any unicast ones it operates.
> I think you're just arguing against having multiple servers, not
> against anycast.
You may think that, but you'd be very wrong to suggest I was making
that argument because I'm not.
I am saying that an all-anycast solution *is* a SPoF if it's the only
DNS service offering that's used: ie sourced from one provider, no
matter how robust and redundant their service is. YMMV.
More information about the dns-operations