[DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for precise traffic scheduling
"zuopeng@cnnic.cn" <zuopeng@cnnic.cn> Wed, 13 December 2017 07:41 UTC
Return-Path: <zuopeng@cnnic.cn>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1156812751F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 23:41:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.366
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.366 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_04=0.556, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3552mvNICwA5 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 23:40:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp13.cnnic.cn [218.241.118.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 058801274D2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 23:40:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from CNNIC-THINK (unknown [218.241.103.198]) by ocmail02.zx.nicx.cn (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf0CZoNyD2TBaldQ7AA--.30971S2; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:40:51 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:40:50 +0800
From: "zuopeng@cnnic.cn" <zuopeng@cnnic.cn>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7, 2, 7, 166[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2017121315404971736813@cnnic.cn>
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_001_NextPart338202861278_=----"
X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf0CZoNyD2TBaldQ7AA--.30971S2
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoW7ArW3Cr1xZryfJr4xAr1UKFg_yoW5JF13pF ZaqF4DJr1kJFW8GaykZw4kWFWFvFn3JFy7AFsxGrZIvr4YgFyavrWjkw4UuFsrAr47tr4S vrWqkr48AFn0yaDanT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUULEb7Iv0xC_Kw4lb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r1j6r4UM7CY07I2 0VC2zVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rw A2F7IY1VAKz4vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Gr0_Xr1l84ACjcxK6xII jxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Cr0_Gr1UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_Cr1j6rxdM28EF7xvwV C2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW0oVCq3wAS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487M2AExVA0xI80 1c8C04v7Mc02F40Eb7x2x7xS6r4j6ryUMc02F40En4AKxVAvwIkv4cxYr24l5I8CrVAqjx CE14ACF2xKxwAqx4xG6cxCj2AI6xk0xcxE6r17Mc02F40Ew4AK048IF2xKxVWUJVW8JwAq x4xG6xAIxVCFxsxG0wAqx4xG6I80eVA0xI0YY7vIx2IE14AGzxvEb7x7McIj6xIIjxv20x vE14v26r1j6r18McIj6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwAm72CE4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1lF7xv r2IYc2Ij64vIr41lFcxC0VAYjxAxZF0Ew4CEw7xC0wACY4xI67k04243AVC20s07MxkIec xEwVAFwVW8CwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwC20s026c02 F40E14v26r106r1rMI8I3I0E7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jr0_Jr ylIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7Cj xVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rW3Jr0E3s1lIxAIcVC2z280aVAFwI 0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVWUJVW8JbIYCTnIWIevJa73UjIFyTuYvjxU k2jyUUUUU
X-CM-SenderInfo: x2xr1vlqj6u0xqlfhubq/
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/QXgfm118w_-2AFPbouBd-0Oznt8>
Subject: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for precise traffic scheduling
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 07:41:01 -0000
Hi everyone,
Here’s a problem about CDN traffic scheduling. So far as I know, many business companies use multi-CDN to speed up their websites and the CDN providers have requirements for precise traffic scheduling especially in the rush hour of traffic.
As CDN providers usually manage authoritative DNS for their clients, the most common method for real-time traffic scheduling is to change the A records of CDN nodes. It does have some positive effects. But because of the lack of DNS protocol support (especially on the recursive server side), a CDN company can’t schedule traffic very precisely.
For example, a CDN provider can’t schedule 70% of traffic to node A and 30% of traffic to node B. Even though it places the addresses of both A and B, it can’t determine recursive server’s response to clients. For example, some recursive server may round-robin the address to clients.
For better precise CDN traffic scheduling, I have an idea that defines 3 new records from extending 3 existing DNS resource records: A, AAAA and CNAME, by adding a “weight” attribute,as below:
[<owner> <ttl> <class> CNAME <target>] -> [<owner> <ttl> <class> CNAMEX <weight> <target>]
[<owner> <ttl> <class> A <address>] -> [<owner> <ttl> <class> AX <weight> <address>]
[<owner> <ttl> <class> AAAA <address>] -> [<owner> <ttl> <class> AAAAX <weight> <address>]
The reasons for doing this are :
(1) By adding “weight” in CNAMEX, a multi-CDN user can manage the traffic ratio among different CDN providers by itself easily.
(2) By adding “weight” in A/AAAA, a CDN provider can manage the traffic ratio among different nodes by itself easily.
For compatibility, an authoritative server should place the CNAMEX/AX/AAAAX records in additional section in a DNS response for a “A/AAAA” query. A “weight-aware” recursive server should make use of the “CNAMEX/AX/AAAAX” in the additional section to manage the answer to clinents according to the weight of each RR. A “weight-not-aware” recursive server can just ignore these RRs and still work normally.
Here is an example: If a CDN provider configures AX records for “www.example.com” as below which indicates “1.1.1.1” should account for 80% in response while “2.2.2.2” accounting for 20%. A “weight-aware” recursive server should reply to clients accordingly.
Any comment or advice is highly appreciated!
Thank you!!
zuopeng@cnnic.cn
- [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for precise t… zuopeng@cnnic.cn
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… bert hubert
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… zuopeng@cnnic.cn
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… fujiwara
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… zuopeng@cnnic.cn
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… bert hubert
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… Lanlan Pan
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… zuopeng@cnnic.cn
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… Robert Edmonds
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… 左鹏
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Ask for advice of 3 new RRs for preci… Robert Edmonds