Re: Generic anycast addresses...

[Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 02:31:19PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Toerless Eckert wrote on 02/06/2019 14:03:
> > IMHO, it would be lovely to primarily think of standardizing whats
> > IMHO been most missing piece for more proliferation of anycast, and
> > thats an appropriate prototol for anycast members to signal their membership.
> 
> as an observation, this would introduce host-level state into the network,
> which has scalability consequences.

The host-level state also exists today, when you just setup anycast
address routing for a couple of e.g.: anycast DNS servers. Its just more
complicated because its not fully automated: you need to hav an operator
or SDN controller create those anycast route prefixes and then make sure
that the host config is aligned.

Aka: not disagreeing with your startement about state, just with the
statement that host<->network signaling changes it. It just automates
it and removes manual, unaligned config issues, accelerates deployments,
....

Cheers
    Teroelss
> 
> Nick