nanog mailing list archives

Re: Anycast provider for SMTP?

From: Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:28:24 +0100

On 15/06/2015 19:09, William Herrin wrote:

Anycast + TCP = much pain, for reasons which should be obvious.


This was presented at some conference or other a couple of years ago:

https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog37/presentations/matt.levine.pdf


Nick

Current thread:

Anycast provider for SMTP? Joe Hamelin (Jun 15)
- RE: Anycast provider for SMTP? Jürgen Jaritsch (Jun 15)
  - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Christopher Morrow (Jun 15)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Joe Hamelin (Jun 15)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? William Herrin (Jun 15)
- Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? John Orthoefer (Jun 15)
- Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? William Herrin (Jun 15)
  - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Nick Hilliard (Jun 15)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Dave Taht (Jun 15)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Joe Abley (Jun 15)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Dave Taht (Jun 15)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Randy Bush (Jun 15)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Dave Taht (Jun 15)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Matt Palmer (Jun 16)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Rafael Possamai (Jun 17)
    - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? John Orthoefer (Jun 15)
- Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? Bill Woodcock (Jun 15)
  - Re: Anycast provider for SMTP? William Herrin (Jun 15)

(Thread continues...)