On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Rodney Joffe wrote: : You started from a point of having no idea that UltraDNS used anycast, : confirmed for everyone in your second email that you had no clue about : how anycast worked, Please stop the bellicose, holier-than-thou attitude because you feel like assuming that I don't have networking experience. It's getting tiresome. I apologize for whatever I've done to offend you. What I didn't know at first was that UltraDNS's system was based on anycast. Yes, it was my oversight, probably due to my own complacency with the gTLDs Just Working for so long. Once I was notified of that fact, my perspective on the problem changed quite a bit. I do know how anycast routing works, and that it failed miserably in this particular case. The implementation failure specifics are not my concern on this point; the simple fact is that a critical gTLD resource failed. Blindly trusting that the all-anycast implementation in use will work "better" in the future seemed a rather bad idea to me in the context of a gTLD. I was trying to figure out, with the help of others who have been far more gracious, what possibilities exist that could help keep the failure from happening again -- outside the scope of this particular anycast implementation. : But it's really just that other people actually take time to research : issues before mouthing off. Actually, my first few requests for corroborating information ("research") received several mouthing-off responses. Much of this thread has required me to fend off rather improper personal attacks -- this one included -- from people such as yourself, while at the same time attempting to get assistance to analyze a difficult to see, corner case problem with a critical resource. I have apologized offlist to a few people whose heated remarks to me received heated messages in response, and I apologize to all on-list right now. That is not appropriate here in either direction. : In the interim, feel free to post your operational experience Ultimatum demands like this are just not called for, and I will not be a party to it. However, I'm happy to discuss it offlist with anyone who may be interested; there are business-vs.-personal reasons that I cannot discuss this on-list. -- -- Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> <tv@pobox.com>