Yes I know they are the Google servers. Google are subpoenaed for those logs so often it’s easier for them to just co-locate government assets.

I think it’s OK to use normal DNS service, except in certain countries during times of information clamp down. This is obviously when free information might be most valuable so it makes sense to have resilience against the kinds of oppression that we all have seen before.

For me the big challenge with the Anycast isn’t the technical aspects, it’s how to do it without single entity ownership?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I think we would need multiple sets of anycast relays, run by different organisations or groups based in different jurisdictions. Then if one gets shut down or is forced to remove content, the others can continue to operate.

Also, I’m not sure if you’ve seen this already but I’ve been experimenting with a geographically diverse relay using geo DNS to redirect to the closest server with failover if a server fails. It provides some of the benefits of anycast but not all. I’m considering how this could be made less reliant on a single GeoDNS provider. Details of what I have set up are here:

https://www.austrich.net/austrich-relay/

Haven’t seen that yet. Amazing.

Some reading for me.

exactly - ISP n BGP can tear down by law enforcement in anywhere - that dependent tech solution wont work