Re: [dhcwg] DDNS-DHCP [6]: Relationship between DNS TTL and DHCP lease length

Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Thu, 19 June 2003 21:36 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA19856 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:36:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5JLa5x07825 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:36:05 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19T74f-000228-1Z for dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:36:05 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA19801 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:36:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19T72L-0003ef-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:33:41 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19T72L-0003ec-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:33:41 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19T74b-0001ur-OB; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:36:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19T741-0001u2-30 for dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:35:25 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA19774 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:35:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19T71h-0003eL-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:33:01 -0400
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19T71h-0003e6-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:33:01 -0400
Received: from cisco.com (funnel.cisco.com [161.44.168.79]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h5JLYmO1009111; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:34:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rdroms-w2k.cisco.com (rtp-vpn2-720.cisco.com [10.82.242.208]) by cisco.com (8.8.5-Cisco.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA02180; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:34:47 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20030619173047.047deaf0@funnel.cisco.com>
X-Sender: rdroms@funnel.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:33:07 -0400
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] DDNS-DHCP [6]: Relationship between DNS TTL and DHCP lease length
Cc: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>, dhcwg@ietf.org, namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <200306191240.56057.mellon@fugue.com>
References: <14436.1056021556@munnari.OZ.AU> <4.3.2.7.2.20030618091029.00b76578@funnel.cisco.com> <14436.1056021556@munnari.OZ.AU>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

I agree with Ted ... in fact, I had a conversation about
exactly this problem earlier today.

In theory, any application shouldn't depend on just DNS to
identify and establish contact with the correct endpoint
(server).  In practice, we have many such applications
deployed today, so we should be careful not to provide
another path for breakage...

- Ralph

At 12:40 PM 6/19/2003 -0500, Ted Lemon wrote:
>On Thursday 19 June 2003 06:19, Robert Elz wrote:
> > That is, reworded, to make sure my understanding is correct, the
> > problem to be avoided is having a name referring to an address that
> > is now to be assigned to a different name ?
> >
> > Who cares?
>
>Let's say machine X has an SMTP listener, and machine Y also has an SMTP
>listener.   Machine X gets an IP address, Z, from the DHCP server.   Then the
>owner of Machine X wanders away, leaving the lease active.   The lease
>expires, and then machine Y gets the address.   But there is still an A
>record for machine X pointing at IP address Z.   So now, machine Q connects
>to Z because of that A record, and tries to drop mail for X on Y.   Y will
>either bounce it immediately, or bounce it after it notices that the A record
>for X is pointing at it.   So we'd really like it if the time that the A
>record goes away and the time that the lease goes away are fairly close
>together, so that the chances of this happening are slim.
>
>Of course, I would say that this is a broken configuration anyway - you 
>really
>want to use protocols that verify who they're talking to if you have a mobile
>computer.   But that's the basis for caring about this sort of thing, and
>while I don't think we can completely solve the problem, it's worth setting
>things up to minimize the damage that occurs in cases like this.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>dhcwg mailing list
>dhcwg@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg


_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg