Wednesday 4 September, Kitakyushu International Conference Centre, Kitakyushu, Japan
Meeting commenced: 6:00pm
Chair: Bill Woodcock
The Chair introduced the BOF and noted that no formal agenda had been set. He encouraged a wide range of participation in the discussions.
Bill Woodcock, Packet Clearing House
- There was discussion of anycast addresses for distributed DNS and reverse DNS servers. The presenter noted that this can be used to reduce latency and jitter.
- There was a discussion about the prospect that anycast could help to provide better performance. It was noted that it can also increase diversity.
- There was speculation as to the role of anycast in BGP.
- It was noted that there are two forms of anycast: shared unicast within an AS (RFC 3258) and multiple AS anycast. Some doubts were expressed about the value of the latter form and it was noted that it has not been seen in production use. It was suggested that this has potential to increase likelihood of people not authorised to announce IP addresses and provide data that shouldn't be provided.
- There was a question regarding the merit of investing in making DNS work in this region. It was noted that majority of requests to APNIC come from out of the region. However, it was conceded that there is still room for improvement of DNS issues.
- The presenter noted that on his recent visit to Kathmandu, pings were taking 3-8 seconds. It was noted that with widespread DSL deployment, the modem is no longer the bottleneck.
- It was suggested that working on DNS issues is of benefit to the community in general and that if there is general agreement, the APNIC Secretariat would happily continue such activities. In particular, APNIC could encourage more people to register reverse DNS delegations.
- It was suggested that although anycast structure is a good thing, but would not necessarily make any difference to the user experience.
- It was noted that APNIC receives 1,000-2,000 DNS queries per second, mostly from out of the region.
- There was a suggestion to deploy DNSsec on the in-addr tree.
- There was general agreement that APNIC should be more active in offering secondary name services.
Meeting closed: 6:35pm
Minuted by: Sam Dickinson
Open action items
Top | BOFs