> unicast mechanism is different from anycast. Also, there is no
> need for the receiver to be aware of the fact that it has an
> anycast address - it could be part of an anycast group without
> it's knowledge.
Nope. It's knowledge is the _only_ thing differing anycast of unicasts.
They are indistingushable outside of receivers.
I suspect we talk about different things. 8)
> I'd written up something a while ago describing one such trick, which
> I'll be glad to dig up & send to you if you are interested - let me
I am. Please, send if you find it. It is interesting at least
> anything formal yet, there was no intent to prohibit it's use within
> individual administrative domains either.
It would be pretty funny, if some IETF meeting prohibited to do something
within an individual administrative domain 8)8)8)