IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Chuck Anderson <cra@WPI.EDU> Mon, 19 October 2009 11:50 UTC

Return-Path: <cra@WPI.EDU>
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 D641C28C157 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:50:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 9drEATdFHiC8 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:50:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MAIL1.WPI.EDU (MAIL1.WPI.EDU [130.215.36.91]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A65C28C13D for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:50:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SMTP.WPI.EDU (SMTP.WPI.EDU [130.215.36.186]) by MAIL1.WPI.EDU (8.14.4.Beta1/8.14.4.Beta1) with ESMTP id n9JBogUV030633 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:50:42 -0400
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 MAIL1.WPI.EDU n9JBogUV030633
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=wpi.edu; s=_dkim; t=1255953042; bh=mOq08j2VXU/2Lv29J5Y/iN2Ke7BekkWajR2+sIU2xzE=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:In-Reply-To; b=ACbNeTysO9UB/sismuij4XWO1b2YcCXX87ioKSVUuUiEpMiXnCUaVp7NpYyxm85ZK Oo2UFxDlaDrxmrIoKPxxQzDdaKhQSMbLSGCagm6LBfVywBJ73oxPvJsTEEZDYGG8bv 9U7Xh6O0jYgq5loTa9Wm4vDImbxDePam4Bjm50Pg=
Received: from angus.ind.WPI.EDU (ANGUS.IND.WPI.EDU [130.215.130.21]) by SMTP.WPI.EDU (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n9JBofAw008835 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:50:42 -0400 (envelope-from cra@WPI.EDU)
Received: from angus.ind.WPI.EDU (angus.ind.WPI.EDU [127.0.0.1]) by angus.ind.WPI.EDU (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n9JBofuL028363 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:50:41 -0400
Received: (from cra@localhost) by angus.ind.WPI.EDU (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id n9JBofof028362 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:50:41 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: angus.ind.WPI.EDU: cra set sender to cra@WPI.EDU using -f
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:50:41 -0400
From: Chuck Anderson <cra@WPI.EDU>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20091019115041.GA19608@angus.ind.WPI.EDU>
Mail-Followup-To: dhcwg@ietf.org
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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <669B95F2-FA8F-47AA-AB8A-4292DDB1A4EF@nominum.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
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: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:50:41 -0000

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 01:03:34AM -0700, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Oct 19, 2009, at 12:29 AM, Niall.oReilly+lists@ucd.ie wrote:
>> 	Don't you mean load scattering (rather than balancing),
>> 	or am I missing something?
>
> Try looking up the A record on a name with three different A records,  
> three different times, and notice how the ordering changes.

The ordering rotation isn't guaranteed.  If there is some standard out 
there that specifies this behavior, I'd love to know what it is.  
There was some recent controversy over this idea of relying on the 
ordering of DNS answers for load balancing (or scattering) purposes in 
the context of RFC3484 and Linux's glibc:

http://people.redhat.com/drepper/linux-rfc3484.html

getaddrinfo() doesn't maintain the DNS server's ordering of answers, 
because it needs to sort the results for sane behavior in the face of 
dual-stack servers and source-address selection.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email