On 16 May 2004, at 22:09, John Kristoff wrote:
On Sun, 16 May 2004 19:01:17 -0400 Joe Abley <jabley@xxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf