Re: [address-policy-wg] Policy Change Request - Allow address allocations for anycast DNS operation

Hm, it's not "the UDP packet size limit", it is "the packet size limit for DNS over UDP without the application of EDNS.0". I may not have followed things too closely, but it makes me sort of wonder why a push towards EDNS.0 is not being advocated instead of polluting the routing space to compensate for people who have not yet upgraded their software.

bingo! we seem to be pushing address space sales at the expense of routing/conservation, with no real justification. but folk have been ignoring me on this for years; so i'll go back to sleep now.

Of course, people may still dream up configurations which would exceed the EDNS.0 DNS over UDP packet size limit.

and they will, just to be silly and grab a /24 randy