Re: Fwd: Re: note from the iesg plenary

[Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>]

Not clear you want to have host routes in the global routing system, but
that doesn't eliminate anycast use.  It means that the routing exchange on
those /128s has to be limited to IGPs.

Brian Haberman wrote:
> Eliot,
>      Yes, I am well aware that DNS is an ideal use of anycast.  That is
> part of the reason why v6 anycast is of interest to people.  However,
> my point has been to find out if anyone thinks that having 128-bit host
> routes in the global routing table is going to scale.  Or, would you
> think that anycast DNS deployed within a domain/site/admin scope
> region is a better solution?
> 
> Brian
--
Eliot Lear
lear@cisco.com