North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Slashdot: Providers Ignoring DNS TTL?

  • From: Bill Stewart
  • Date: Sun Apr 24 04:36:15 2005
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=eeYXzn1AI7pqGjU0lwzsvyf+2IElhjTd24k9IwPhAKuuzV9O9YGyciJAlpy1xvs5cZ38qiZ/7PduZ8ADgUMQss3WxuC2OXmy/wnsunhDl1KyVGlYpRpNsJWJOT2JiQRbRA2idjVQSmLG1Np2yG4Rjw0nmGKrryByKefbXlVqn/o=
> > Well, PPLB isn't the end of the world. But PPLB is coming, and the smart
> > people will be prepared for it.  They dumb people, well, they're dumb.
> > What can be expected from dumb people?

There are a variety of things that don't like PPLB, notably IPSEC.
One problem is that if packet lengths aren't constant, you can get
out-of-order delivery,
and some protocols don't deal with that very well, as well as the load
not really getting  as perfectly balanced as proponents like to think.
 (There's also the problem that
some popular small routers implement PPLB by burning too many of the CPU cycles
that they don't have enough of, so you've got to consider the tradeoffs between
buying more network connections vs. a bigger router.)
-- 
----
             Thanks;     Bill

Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still experimental so far.
And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.