[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
quietly....
On 02/02/2011 17:43, Matt Addison wrote:
> Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? What's wrong with having default
> well known (potentially anycasted) resolver addresses, which can then be
> overridden by RA/DHCP/static configuration?
because that increases the complexity of the system, and complexity leads
to more failure modes. If you model how this would work on a state
diagram, you'll see that there are several inherent ways that this will
cause serious problems when people start doing things like removing the
well known addresses (because they don't use them), and so forth.
This is a well-examined problem: well known unicast listener addresses are
a bad, bad idea.
Nick
- References:
- quietly....
- From: rcarpen at network1.net (Randy Carpenter)
- quietly....
- From: davei at otd.com (Dave Israel)
- quietly....
- From: drais at icantclick.org (david raistrick)
- quietly....
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- quietly....
- From: kauer at biplane.com.au (Karl Auer)
- quietly....
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- quietly....
- From: cmadams at hiwaay.net (Chris Adams)
- quietly....
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- quietly....
- From: davei at otd.com (Dave Israel)
- quietly....
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
- quietly....
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- quietly....
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
- quietly....
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- quietly....
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
- quietly....
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- quietly....
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
- quietly....
- From: nanog at phaze.org (Greg Estabrooks)
- quietly....
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
- quietly....
- From: drais at icantclick.org (david raistrick)
- quietly....
- From: matt.addison at lists.evilgeni.us (Matt Addison)