Questions about anycasting setup

Pete Carah pete at
Fri Mar 9 03:01:53 CST 2012

On 03/09/2012 12:11 AM, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
> Bill,
> woody at (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.

More information about the NANOG mailing list