Re: quietly....

[Matt Addison <matt.addison () lists evilgeni us>]

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:28, david raistrick <drais () icantclick org> wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Feb 2011, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>
>  No, the point is that DNS resolvers in different places all use the same
> > addresses. So at the cyber cafe 3003::3003 is the cyber cafe DNS but at the
> > airport 3003::3003 is the airport DNS. (Or in both cases, if they don't run
> > a DNS server, one operated by their ISP.)
>
> Because no one has ever had a need to coexist with other DNS servers on the
> same subnet, right?   After all, there should only ever be 1 authorative
> source of information, and there's no way we would ever want to have an
> exception for that.

Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? What's wrong with having default
well known (potentially anycasted) resolver addresses, which can then be
overridden by RA/DHCP/static configuration?

~Matt