Loading content...
Imagine you could assign the exact same IP address to servers in New York, London, Tokyo, and São Paulo—and when users connect to that address, the network automatically routes them to the nearest server. No DNS lookups to update, no complex routing policies to maintain, no geographic databases to query. The network itself makes the optimal routing decision, transparently and instantly.
This isn't science fiction—it's Anycast routing, a networking technique that has become foundational to the modern internet. Every time you use Cloudflare's 1.1.1.1 DNS resolver, access content from a major CDN, or connect to Google's services, you're benefiting from Anycast. It's the invisible infrastructure enabling sub-100ms response times worldwide.
Understanding Anycast is essential for system designers building globally distributed services, as it represents a fundamentally different approach to traffic distribution than DNS-based load balancing.
By the end of this page, you will have mastered: how Anycast works at the BGP routing layer; the difference between Anycast, Unicast, Broadcast, and Multicast; why Anycast is ideal for stateless protocols like DNS; Anycast's role in CDN architecture and DDoS mitigation; TCP and Anycast—challenges and solutions; and how to implement Anycast in cloud and on-premise environments.
To understand Anycast, we must first contrast it with other IP addressing schemes:
Unicast (One-to-One): The standard addressing model. Each IP address identifies exactly one destination. When you send a packet to 192.0.2.1, it goes to the single server assigned that address.
Broadcast (One-to-All): A packet sent to a broadcast address (e.g., 255.255.255.255 on a local network) is delivered to all hosts on that network segment.
Multicast (One-to-Many): Packets sent to a multicast address are delivered to all hosts that have joined that multicast group. Used for streaming video and IPTV.
Anycast (One-to-Nearest): The same IP address is assigned to multiple hosts at different network locations. Packets are routed to the topologically 'nearest' host based on BGP routing metrics. The network selects the destination, not the application.
| Scheme | Senders | Receivers | Routing Decision | Use Cases |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unicast | One | One (specific) | Explicit destination | Standard client-server communication |
| Broadcast | One | All on segment | All local hosts | ARP, DHCP, local discovery |
| Multicast | One | Group members | Subscription-based | Video streaming, IPTV |
| Anycast | One | One (nearest) | BGP routing metrics | DNS, CDN, DDoS mitigation |
How Anycast Works at the Network Layer:
Anycast operates through the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), the routing protocol that governs how packets traverse the internet between autonomous systems (ASes).
Here's the mechanism:
Identical Address Announcement: Multiple servers in different physical locations announce the same IP address (or IP prefix) to their upstream BGP peers.
BGP Path Selection: Each router on the internet receives multiple BGP announcements for the same prefix. It selects the 'best' path based on BGP metrics: shortest AS path, lowest origin type, lowest MED, etc.
Nearest Server Receives Traffic: When a client sends a packet to the Anycast address, it follows the 'best' BGP path, naturally reaching the topologically nearest server.
Automatic Failover: If a server goes down, it stops announcing the route. BGP converges (within seconds to minutes), and traffic automatically routes to the next-nearest server.
Unlike load balancers that distribute traffic based on configured algorithms, Anycast relies entirely on BGP routing decisions. Traffic distribution is determined by network topology, not application logic. This means Anycast optimizes for 'nearest' (in network terms), which usually correlates with lowest latency but isn't the same as optimal capacity utilization.
Anycast offers unique advantages that make it indispensable for certain use cases. Understanding these advantages—and their limitations—helps architects select the right tool for global traffic distribution.
Advantage 1: Zero-Configuration Geographic Routing
With DNS-based GSLB, you must maintain geographic databases, health checks, and routing policies. A user in Sydney requires your DNS server to recognize their location and return the appropriate IP. With Anycast, none of this is necessary—the network itself handles geographic routing based on real-time topology.
Advantage 2: Resilience Through Automatic Failover
When an Anycast node fails, it stops announcing its BGP route. Upstream routers detect the route withdrawal and BGP reconverges, typically within 30-90 seconds. Traffic automatically flows to the next-nearest healthy node with no DNS TTL delays, no health check propagation, no manual intervention.
Advantage 3: DDoS Attack Absorption
Anycast is a powerful DDoS mitigation strategy. Attack traffic targeting an Anycast address is distributed across all announcing nodes globally. A 100 Gbps attack becomes 10 Gbps distributed across 10 points of presence—each absorbing a fraction of the attack while legitimate traffic continues flowing.
Real-World Anycast Deployments:
| Service | Anycast IPs | Purpose | Scale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cloudflare DNS | 1.1.1.1, 1.0.0.1 | Public DNS resolver | 275+ cities worldwide |
| Google Public DNS | 8.8.8.8, 8.8.4.4 | Public DNS resolver | Global Google Edge network |
| Root DNS Servers | Various (e.g., 198.41.0.4) | Internet DNS root | Multiple operators, global |
| Cloudflare CDN | Shared IP ranges | Content delivery | 275+ data centers |
| AWS CloudFront | Anycast edge IPs | Content delivery | 400+ PoPs |
| Fastly CDN | Shared IP ranges | Content delivery, compute | Global edge network |
Cloudflare's 1.1.1.1 handles hundreds of billions of DNS queries daily across 275+ cities. This scale would be operationally impossible with traditional unicast addressing—you'd need to manage hundreds of IP addresses, update DNS records constantly, and handle health checks for every location. Anycast reduces this to a single IP address that 'just works' globally.
Anycast is particularly well-suited for stateless, request-response protocols where each packet is self-contained and doesn't require maintaining a session across multiple exchanges. DNS over UDP is the canonical example.
Why DNS and Anycast Are a Perfect Match:
A DNS query is typically a single UDP packet (the query) followed by a single UDP response (the answer). There's no connection state to maintain, no session to preserve, and each query is independent. If the Anycast node changes between queries (due to BGP reconvergence), it doesn't matter—each query is handled completely by whichever node receives it.
The Anycast DNS Flow:
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
# Anycast DNS Request-Response Flow # Step 1: User in Tokyo queries dns.example.com (Anycast: 203.0.113.53)Client (Tokyo) --UDP--> 203.0.113.53:53 DNS Query: "What is the IP for api.example.com?" # Step 2: Network routes to nearest Anycast node (Tokyo PoP)Packet routes via BGP shortest path --> Tokyo Anycast Node (203.0.113.53) # Step 3: Tokyo node respondsTokyo Anycast Node --> UDP Response --> Client (Tokyo) DNS Answer: "api.example.com A 198.51.100.10" # Total latency: ~5ms (Tokyo to Tokyo PoP) # ========================================# Compare with Unicast Alternative: # If DNS server was only in Virginia:Client (Tokyo) --UDP--> Virginia DNS (203.0.113.53):53 DNS Query travels 10,000+ km # Response returns same pathVirginia DNS --> UDP Response --> Client (Tokyo) # Total latency: ~180ms (Tokyo to Virginia round-trip) # Anycast reduced latency by 97% in this example!Other Stateless Use Cases:
Beyond DNS, Anycast works well for:
Anycast for DDoS Mitigation Services:
DDoS mitigation platforms use Anycast extensively. When attack traffic targets an Anycast IP:
While Anycast reduces operational complexity, its primary benefit is performance and resilience. The latency reduction from serving users from nearby nodes has direct business impact—faster DNS resolution means faster page loads, better user experience, and higher conversion rates.
While Anycast works seamlessly for stateless UDP protocols, TCP presents challenges due to its stateful, connection-oriented nature. Understanding these challenges—and their solutions—is critical for deploying Anycast in production HTTP/HTTPS services.
The TCP State Problem:
TCP connections maintain state on both client and server: sequence numbers, acknowledgments, window sizes. This state is tied to a specific server. If BGP routing changes during an active TCP connection (called a 'flap'), packets may route to a different Anycast node that has no knowledge of the connection—causing a connection reset.
When BGP Flaps Happen:
Impact on TCP Connections:
When a BGP flap causes packets to route to a different PoP:
For short-lived HTTP/1.1 or HTTP/2 connections that complete in seconds, this is usually acceptable—the probability of a flap during a single request is low. For long-lived connections (WebSockets, streaming, gRPC streams), the risk increases significantly.
12345678910111213141516171819202122
# TCP Connection Failure During BGP Flap # T=0: Client in Singapore establishes connection to Anycast IPClient (SG) --> TCP SYN --> Anycast IP --> Singapore PoPSingapore PoP --> TCP SYN-ACK --> ClientClient --> TCP ACK --> Singapore PoP[Connection Established to Singapore PoP] # T=5s: HTTP Request in progressClient --> HTTP Request --> Singapore PoPSingapore PoP --> HTTP Response (streaming) --> Client # T=10s: BGP Flap! Singapore PoP route withdrawn (maintenance)# BGP Convergence: Tokyo PoP now preferred for Singapore clients # T=12s: Next TCP packet from clientClient --> TCP Data --> Tokyo PoP # Wrong PoP!Tokyo PoP: "Unknown connection, not in my state table"Tokyo PoP --> TCP RST --> ClientClient: "Connection reset by peer" ❌ # Result: User sees error, must reconnectSolutions for TCP over Anycast:
| Strategy | Mechanism | Tradeoffs |
|---|---|---|
| BGP Stabilization | Tune BGP timers, damping, and prepend to reduce flapping | Slower failover; doesn't eliminate issue |
| Short Connection Lifetime | Keep connections brief; clients reconnect frequently | Works for HTTP request-response; not for streams |
| Connection Migration (QUIC) | QUIC protocol supports connection migration across IPs | Requires QUIC adoption; emerging standard |
| State Synchronization | Sync TCP state across PoPs in real-time | Extremely complex; massive overhead |
| Hybrid Anycast + Unicast | Anycast for initial routing; unicast for established connections | Operational complexity; two-tier addressing |
| Application-Level Retry | Clients automatically retry on connection reset | User experiences brief interruption; good UX design helps |
QUIC (HTTP/3's transport protocol) includes built-in connection migration. Connections are identified by a Connection ID independent of IP address, allowing connections to survive IP changes. This makes QUIC significantly more Anycast-friendly than TCP, and is one reason why CDNs are aggressively adopting QUIC.
Implementing Anycast requires BGP capabilities, IP address resources, and careful network engineering. The complexity of implementation varies significantly between cloud and on-premise environments.
Requirements for Anycast:
Cloud Provider Anycast Options:
Most organizations don't operate their own BGP infrastructure. Cloud providers offer managed Anycast or Anycast-like services:
| Provider | Service | Anycast Support | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| AWS | Global Accelerator | Yes (managed) | Provides static Anycast IPs routing to regional endpoints |
| GCP | Premium Network Tier | Yes (native) | Anycast IPs for load balancers; extensive global network |
| Cloudflare | Spectrum/CDN | Yes (core) | Entire platform is Anycast-native |
| Azure | Front Door | Anycast-like | Uses Microsoft's Anycast edge network |
| Fastly | CDN | Yes (core) | Anycast to edge PoPs globally |
| Equinix Metal | Bring Your Own IP | Manual BGP | Full BGP control for Anycast implementation |
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061
# AWS Global Accelerator - Managed Anycast# Provides static Anycast IPs that route to regional endpoints resource "aws_globalaccelerator_accelerator" "main" { name = "production-api" ip_address_type = "IPV4" enabled = true attributes { flow_logs_enabled = true flow_logs_s3_bucket = aws_s3_bucket.flow_logs.bucket flow_logs_s3_prefix = "global-accelerator/" } # Returns two static Anycast IPs (e.g., 75.2.x.x, 99.83.x.x) # These IPs can be used globally; traffic routes to nearest AWS edge} resource "aws_globalaccelerator_listener" "https" { accelerator_arn = aws_globalaccelerator_accelerator.main.id protocol = "TCP" port_range { from_port = 443 to_port = 443 }} resource "aws_globalaccelerator_endpoint_group" "us_east" { listener_arn = aws_globalaccelerator_listener.https.id endpoint_group_region = "us-east-1" health_check_interval_seconds = 10 health_check_path = "/health" health_check_protocol = "HTTPS" threshold_count = 3 traffic_dial_percentage = 100 endpoint_configuration { endpoint_id = aws_lb.us_east.arn weight = 100 }} resource "aws_globalaccelerator_endpoint_group" "eu_west" { listener_arn = aws_globalaccelerator_listener.https.id endpoint_group_region = "eu-west-1" health_check_interval_seconds = 10 health_check_path = "/health" health_check_protocol = "HTTPS" threshold_count = 3 traffic_dial_percentage = 100 endpoint_configuration { endpoint_id = aws_lb.eu_west.arn weight = 100 }} # Result: Two Anycast IPs that route users to nearest healthy regionSelf-Operated Anycast (Advanced):
For organizations requiring full control, implementing Anycast involves:
Self-operated Anycast is complex and requires deep BGP expertise. Misconfigurations can result in routing loops, black holes, or inadvertently attracting traffic you can't handle. Most organizations should use managed Anycast services (Global Accelerator, CDN providers) rather than operating their own BGP infrastructure.
With both DNS-based load balancing and Anycast available for global traffic distribution, when should you use each? Understanding the tradeoffs helps you architect optimal solutions.
Fundamental Differences:
| Dimension | Anycast | DNS-Based GSLB |
|---|---|---|
| Routing Layer | Network (BGP, IP) | Application (DNS) |
| Routing Granularity | Per-packet/flow | Per-DNS resolution |
| Failover Speed | BGP convergence (seconds-minutes) | DNS TTL expiration (minutes-hours) |
| Client Visibility | No client info (IP layer) | Client IP/ECS (application layer) |
| Policy Flexibility | Limited (BGP metrics) | Extensive (geo, weighted, latency, health) |
| Implementation | Requires BGP infrastructure | Requires intelligent DNS |
| Operational Complexity | High (BGP expertise) | Moderate (DNS expertise) |
| Protocol Support | All IP protocols | All protocols (DNS-resolved) |
When to Choose Anycast:
When to Choose DNS-Based GSLB:
The Hybrid Approach:
Most sophisticated global architectures combine both techniques:
Cloudflare, Fastly, and AWS CloudFront all use this hybrid model: Anycast routes user requests to the nearest edge PoP, then GSLB/origin selection routes cache misses to appropriate origin data centers. This combines Anycast's low-latency edge routing with GSLB's policy flexibility for origin selection.
Anycast routing represents a powerful network-layer technique for distributing traffic globally. It's the invisible backbone enabling the performance and resilience of the internet's largest services. Let's consolidate the key concepts:
What's Next:
We've covered GSLB, DNS-based load balancing, and Anycast routing. Next, we'll explore GeoDNS—a specialized application of DNS-based routing that enables precise geographic targeting for regulatory compliance, localized content, and regional service differentiation.
You've mastered Anycast routing—from BGP fundamentals through TCP challenges and hybrid architectures. You understand when Anycast is the right tool vs. DNS-based alternatives, and how major internet services combine both for optimal global distribution. Next, we'll dive into GeoDNS for geographic routing precision.