nanog mailing list archives

Re: TCP and anycast (was Re: ECN)

From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 09:31:49 +0800

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 1:54 AM Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:

RFC 7094 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7094) describes the pitfalls
& risks of using TCP with an anycast address.


and two decades of operational experience are that prudent deployments
just work.


I agree with Bill/Randy here... this does just work if you understand
your local topology and manage change properly.

Current thread:

Re: ECN, (continued)
- - - Re: ECN Saku Ytti (Nov 13)
    - Re: ECN William Herrin (Nov 13)
    - Re: ECN Lukas Tribus (Nov 13)
    - Re: ECN Saku Ytti (Nov 14)
    - Re: ECN Tore Anderson (Nov 13)
    - Re: ECN Warren Kumari (Nov 13)
    - TCP and anycast (was Re: ECN) Anoop Ghanwani (Nov 13)
    - Re: TCP and anycast (was Re: ECN) Bill Woodcock (Nov 14)
    - Re: TCP and anycast (was Re: ECN) William Herrin (Nov 14)
    - Re: TCP and anycast (was Re: ECN) Randy Bush (Nov 14)
    - Re: TCP and anycast (was Re: ECN) Christopher Morrow (Nov 14)
    - Re: TCP and anycast (was Re: ECN) Randy Bush (Nov 14)
    - Message not available
    - Re: ECN Toke Høiland-Jørgensen via NANOG (Nov 13)
    - Re: ECN Matt Corallo (Nov 13)
    - Re: ECN Anoop Ghanwani (Nov 13)
    - Re: ECN Owen DeLong (Nov 13)
    - Re: ECN Toke Høiland-Jørgensen via NANOG (Nov 14)
    - Re: ECN Jon Lewis (Nov 13)