IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [BEHAVE] proprietary implementation v.s standardisedprotocols//re: draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Wed, 02 December 2009 07:14 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@isc.org>
X-Original-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60EC43A6A1B for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 23:14:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.341
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.341 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.258, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wuhTRAU9KubW for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 23:14:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from farside.isc.org (farside.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:bb::5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AD323A67F7 for <behave@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 23:14:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (drugs.dv.isc.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:214:22ff:fed9:fbdc]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "drugs.dv.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (not verified)) by farside.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A521E6065; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 07:13:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org)
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nB27DtVH060582; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 18:13:55 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from marka@drugs.dv.isc.org)
Message-Id: <200912020713.nB27DtVH060582@drugs.dv.isc.org>
To: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <bcff0fba0912011405x56975fe7t442f60ab8f9a1284@mail.gmail.com> <003501ca72f2$e6021a30$d40c6f0a@china.huawei.com> <000801ca72f8$c3fa5820$c3f0200a@cisco.com> <200912020254.nB22sIvO028323@drugs.dv.isc.org> <002301ca7301$9ef3f4b0$c3f0200a@cisco.com> <200912020549.nB25n8Yu058184@drugs.dv.isc.org> <bcff0fba0912012202l5ba54ac4kb03022e91f08eab9@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:02:52 -0800." <bcff0fba0912012202l5ba54ac4kb03022e91f08eab9@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:13:55 +1100
Sender: marka@isc.org
Cc: behave@ietf.org, Xu Xiaohu <xuxh@huawei.com>, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] proprietary implementation v.s standardisedprotocols//re: draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 07:14:09 -0000

In message <bcff0fba0912012202l5ba54ac4kb03022e91f08eab9@mail.gmail.com>, Camer
on Byrne writes:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
> >
> > In message <002301ca7301$9ef3f4b0$c3f0200a@cisco.com>, "Dan Wing" writes:
> >>
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: marka@isc.org [mailto:marka@isc.org]
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 6:54 PM
> >> > To: Dan Wing
> >> > Cc: 'Xu Xiaohu'; 'Cameron Byrne'; 'Simon Perreault'; behave@ietf.org
> >> > Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] proprietary implementation v.s
> >> > standardisedprotocols//re: draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > In message <000801ca72f8$c3fa5820$c3f0200a@cisco.com>, "Dan
> >> > Wing" writes:
> >> > > ...
> >> > > > > 100% agree. =A0Members in a cluster failing can locally
> >> > be resolved
> >> > > > > without bouncing the Pref64. =A0If entire cluster fails,
> >> > this is very
> >> > > > > unlikely but catastrophic, i just want a fail safe that can work
> >> > > > > *mostly*, and if the networks really broke, asking a
> >> > user to reboot
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Ask a user or ask a huge amount of users?
> >> > >
> >> > > All the affected users.
> >> > >
> >> > > > By the way, if one uses one of those mechanisms defined in
> >> > > > draft-wing-behave-learn-prefix, other than DNS64, to
> >> > > > synthesize IPv6 addresses, does that mean the DNS server or
> >> > > > the DHCP server should also dynamically detect the
> >> > > > availability of each prefix64?
> >> > >
> >> > > Whatever hands out the prefix (DNS, IPv6 router advertisements,
> >> > > DHCPv6) should hand out a functioning prefix. =A0Providing a
> >> > > non-functioning prefix is harmful.
> >> >
> >> > Actually it shouldn't be. =A0If a prefix doesn't work it it like a
> >> > router being down. =A0The machines are just not reachable.
> >>
> >> Not being reachable is what I would define as 'harmful'.
> >
> > You don't, in general, pull hosts from the DNS because a router is
> > down.
> 
> If i understand your statement right, you do pull host from the a
> given DNS server upon failure if it is anycast DNS

No.  Normally you leave the address records in and let the client
determine if the host is reachable or not.  You never want to remove
all addresses as that makes the host disappear and that changes
recovery strategies.

> > --
> > Mark Andrews, ISC
> > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 INTERNET: marka@is=
> c.org
> >
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email