North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Historical
Re: BGP and anycast
- From: hardie
- Date: Tue Jan 30 13:24:23 2001
A good point. This document assumes a DNS context, and thus that the
UDP request and response are self-contained. I will attempt to make
it more clear in the text, but this is exactly the sort of caution I
was trying to get at: do not assume that a hack that works in some
circumstances for the DNS will work for other services.
regards,
Ted Hardie
>
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 hardie@equinix.com wrote:
>
> > One potential problem with using shared unicast addresses is that
> > routers forwarding traffic to them may have more than one available
> > route, and those routes may, in fact, reach different instances of
> > the shared unicast address. Because UDP is self-contained, UDP
> > traffic from a single source reaching different instances presents
> > no problem. TCP traffic, in contrast, may fail or present
>
> That should be a little more precise.
>
> TCP packets can not (for all practical purposes when dealing with "normal"
> clients) be self contained.
>
> UDP packets are self contained, from the network view.
>
> But that does not mean that a particular protocol implemented on top of
> UDP will necessarily still be self contained, merely that it is possible
> for it to be.
>
|
