Re: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-netboot-05 - how to proceed?

"Woundy, Richard" <Richard_Woundy@cable.comcast.com> Thu, 22 October 2009 19:11 UTC

Return-Path: <richard_woundy@cable.comcast.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C0413A6841 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.059, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368]
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 PQLJIYIsm45q for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:11:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from paoakoavas09.cable.comcast.com (paoakoavas09.cable.comcast.com [208.17.35.58]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018FD3A659B for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:11:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([10.52.116.31]) by paoakoavas09.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id KP-NTF18.81117205; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:10:53 -0400
Received: from PACDCEXCMB06.cable.comcast.com ([24.40.15.22]) by PAOAKEXCSMTP02.cable.comcast.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:10:53 -0400
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:10:52 -0400
Message-ID: <8A82D1BFEDDE7E4597978355239BBBCB4C204C@PACDCEXCMB06.cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <200910221814.n9MIETQR002070@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-netboot-05 - how to proceed?
Thread-Index: AcpTQ4+14RmDoVkdQD+fhUbjN2m4gAABnlsg
References: <200910062234.AAA07005@TR-Sys.de><AD61797F-DB2D-4889-8888-5339521ADE8F@nominum.com><OF029AB4A7.6EEA954A-ONC125764B.004E95CE-C125764B.00536F30@de.ibm.com><FBD14811-7C9A-4FCB-8707-071A7CA12B96@nominum.com><OF73909874.9B93FADE-ONC1257653.002E96C8-C1257653.00302A9F@de.ibm.com><589F59F0-3E17-44FF-8918-FED51F03EE4D@nominum.com><4ADC156D.1070709@ucd.ie><669B95F2-FA8F-47AA-AB8A-4292DDB1A4EF@nominum.com><4ADD70CB.2080409@ucd.ie><OF2692FAA8.2F4AF98C-ONC1257657.002954C1-C1257657.00298474@de.ibm.com> <200910221814.n9MIETQR002070@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
From: "Woundy, Richard" <Richard_Woundy@cable.comcast.com>
To: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Oct 2009 19:10:53.0641 (UTC) FILETIME=[60472B90:01CA534B]
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-netboot-05 - how to proceed?
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:11:27 -0000

> That said, it is not clear to me that load balancing is actually a
requirement that needs solving. At least not for preboot loading.

I don't have any personal interest in this netboot approach, but I can
understand why load balancing could be interesting to the netbook folks.
After a power outage, I can imagine a lot of devices simultaneously
rebooting, and therefore there may be a much higher load of netboot
traffic. At the same time, one might not want to purchase lots of
netboot servers for a once-a-year power outage event.

-- Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Thomas Narten
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 2:14 PM
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-netboot-05 - how to
proceed?

I am opposed to relying on DNS round robin as the
default/best/recommended approach to do load balancing when booting.

Round Robin DNS load balancing is not officially supported in the IETF
because the only way you can get it to work properly is to disable DNS
caching (i.e, use TTLs of 0) so that a query always goes back to a
server than can explicitely modify the ordering. But disabling caching
has negative implications for DNS performance, reliability, etc. You
then also have to have specially modified servers (that reorder
results based on various criteria) that are again not officially
blessed by the IETF.

The IETF DNS WGs have discussed this many many times, and have so far
not been willing to bless such load balancing. I do know that it is
used in some environments and can be a useful tool at times.

If it is a requirement that remote booting include support for load
balancing, I think we need to first make note of that and develop a
proper solution. There are number that could work that are fairly
simple (e.g., consider the DNS SRV "weight" mechanism).

That said, it is not clear to me that load balancing is actually a
requirement that needs solving. At least not for preboot loading.

Comments?

Thomas
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg