Re: [DNSOP] interop problems with getaddrinfo() address selection

* Dean Anderson:

> I think it is well known that Round robin DNS load balancing is not a
> guaranteed behavior.  The "severe operational problems"  from its
> non-support are the fault of unreasonable reliance on insufficient
> testing and insufficient analysis of the requirements of DNS resolvers.  
> I think the solution here is to get better engineers who read rather
> than assume.

Huh?  If I understand you correctly, you're saying that it's not worth
fixing the RFC, even if its guidelines seem to cause practical problems
-- because knowledgeable folks will ignore it anyway.

> This is not a DNS operational issue.

Maybe, but which non-IPv6 WG concerns itself with resolver behavior?

> But as a protocol/resolver specification issue, I'd have to say that I
> think sorting or randomization should be site specific.  Most of the
> time, giving the closest address prefix first, followed by next closest
> prefix is the right choice, as it has the best chance of localizing
> traffic.

Doesn't seem to be the case anymore--these days, hardly any services
reside on the same network as the clients.

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