On Sat, 4 Sep 2004, Alex Bligh wrote: > if in a heavily plural anycast domain prefix route changes are more > common than "normal" routes (albeit without - dampening aside - > affecting reachability), does this mean route dampening > disproportionately harms such routes? This would be an argument in favor of either asking peers to tag anycast-learned routes no-export, as F-root does, or using anycast prefixes which are short enough that they won't make it through many people's filters, and advertising the aggregate from your tunnel-hub (which is presumed to be stable), as we do. I suspect that a stand-alone prefix, advertised with equal mask length from all instances, without no-export, would be relatively more vulnerable to dampening, as Alex suggests. Topologically, it appears little different than a massively peered or massively multi-homed network of any other sort, as the papers Randy is citing describe. -Bill