nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv4 Anycast?
From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:48:05 -0500
Joe Provo wrote:
And the overall message is that only the (prefix holder|originating ASn[s]) can tell you if it is intended or not. Sadly, this is not a useful metric for a third-party to use to determine prefix annoucnement legitimacy. Perhaps an update to RPSL to allow for intentional multiple origins is overdue?
Legitimacy no, but it does lead one to believe that most anycast (given > 3 locations) is homogeneous. I would love multiple origin support.
Jack
Current thread:
- Re: IPv4 Anycast?, (continued)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Jack Bates (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Patrick W. Gilmore (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Kevin Loch (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Jeroen Massar (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Shin SHIRAHATA (Apr 22)
- IPv6 Operators List (which also covers 6to4 operation ;) (Was: IPv4 Anycast?) Jeroen Massar (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv6 Operators List (which also covers 6to4 operation ; ) (Was: IPv4 Anycast?) Shin SHIRAHATA (Apr 23)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Patrick W. Gilmore (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Jack Bates (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Joe Provo (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Jack Bates (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Patrick W. Gilmore (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Rob Evans (Apr 22)
- Re: IPv4 Anycast? Zhenkai Zhu (Apr 22)