On 03/09/2012 12:11 AM, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
Bill,
woody@pch.net (Bill Woodcock) wrote:
2. We plan to use this anycasting based setup for DNS during initial few months. Assuming low traffic for DNS say ~10Mbps on average (on 100Mbps port) and transit from just single network (datacenter itself) - is this setup OK for simple software based BGP like Quagga or Bird? Yes, and in fact, that's how nearly all large production anycast networks are built??? Each anycast instance contains its own BGP speaker, which announces its service prefix to adjacent BGP-speaking routers, whether those be your own, or your transit-provider's. Doing exactly as you describe is, in fact, best-practice. Well, let's say, using Quagga/BIRD might not really be best practice for everybody... (e.g., *we* are using Cisco equipment for this) Actually there is a *very* good reason why many (most?) anycast instances use quagga/BIRD/gated/etc to speak bgp (or even ospf for internal anycast) which using a Cisco (or any separate router) usually won't accomplish.
-- Pete
Using anycasting for DNS is, to my knowledge, best practice nowadays.