nanog mailing list archives
Re: Anycast but for egress
From: Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 12:21:02 +0200
On 7/28/21 01:16, Daniel Corbe wrote:
This is interesting... I wonder whether Anycast will still have some failure modes and break TCP connections if routing (configuration) were to change? I checked the PDF linked by Bill Woodcock... while the methodology is the same from 20y ago, would the data still be the same (order of magnitude)? :)
In our small experience, not at all.We are Anycast'ing DNS (authoritative and recursive), NTP and TACACS+. All works well, across 11 or so countries.
Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: Anycast but for egress, (continued)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Mark Tinka (Jul 27)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Matt Harris (Jul 27)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Adam Thompson (Jul 27)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Vimal (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Daniel Corbe (Jul 27)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Andras Toth (Jul 27)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Vimal (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Bill Woodcock (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Vimal (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Baldur Norddahl (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Baldur Norddahl (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Mark Tinka (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Randy Bush (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Bill Woodcock (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Mark Tinka (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Vimal (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress William Herrin (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Glenn McGurrin via NANOG (Jul 28)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Vimal (Jul 29)
- Re: Anycast but for egress Christopher Morrow (Jul 30)