On 16 May 2004, at 22:09, John Kristoff wrote:
On Sun, 16 May 2004 19:01:17 -0400
Joe Abley <jabley(_at_)isc(_dot_)org> wrote:
reconvergence events to non-anycast servers). In addition, before the
frequency of the route churn became sufficiently high to cause a
problem, it would be well and truly damped to death by anybody running
with common BGP damping parameters and the inability to talk to the
few
root servers which have anycast instances would be the last of your
problems.
Not necessarily. Common dampening parameters exclude some 'golden
networks' such as root name server networks from damping. RIPE 229 and
Rob Thomas' Secure BGP template being perhaps the two most widely cited
guides that suggest such a practice.
The point I was trying to make was not that the path to the anycast
roots would be dampened, but that topology oscillations that caused
path changes with that frequency might well cause everything else to be
dampened, or cause the prefixes announced from the supposedly-affected
AS to become dampened in other ASes.
This was intended to be degenerate-case handwaving.
Joe
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf