On 2/13/11 10:31 AM, David Conrad wrote:
On Feb 13, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Of course, one might ask why those well known anycast addresses are "owned" by 12 different organizations instead of being "golden" addresses specified in an RFC or somesuch, but that gets into root server operator politics...
there are perfectly valid reasons why you might want to renumber one,
Ignoring historical mistakes, what would they be?
gosh, I can't imagine why anyone would want to renumber of out 198.32.64.0/24... making them immutable pretty much insures that you'll then find a reason to do so.
the current institutional heterogeneity has pretty good prospects for survivability.
"Golden" addresses dedicated to root service (as opposed to 'owned' by the root serving organization) means nothing regarding who is operating servers behind those addresses. It does make it easier to change who performs root service operation (hence the politics).
There are plenty of cautionary tales to be told about well-known addresses. assuming that for the sake of the present that we forsake future flexibility then sure golden addresses are great.
Regards, -drc