IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Terminology question: split DNS

Robert Edmonds <edmonds@mycre.ws> Mon, 19 March 2018 18:26 UTC

Return-Path: <edmonds@mycre.ws>
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 97CCA12D95B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 DRL2Zy11IqQ8 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mycre.ws (mycre.ws [45.33.102.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5101612D893 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:26:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by chase.mycre.ws (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6D3C712C1A00; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:26:49 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:26:49 -0400
From: Robert Edmonds <edmonds@mycre.ws>
To: Artyom Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20180319182649.yzydmdrhlika35z3@mycre.ws>
References: <3D490CA8-0733-47AD-A088-113B1116B207@vpnc.org> <CALZ3u+a9o1g0ZTkGjqWwfyV9phovEgu6Linp137yvM=JHSnj-A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALZ3u+a9o1g0ZTkGjqWwfyV9phovEgu6Linp137yvM=JHSnj-A@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/aVgie5Oq4IJpGBG2H-H0ZP9krNw>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Terminology question: split DNS
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: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 18:26:59 -0000

Artyom Gavrichenkov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 5:47 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
> > [..] the basic point is that the
> >    correspondence between a given FQDN (fully qualified domain name) and a
> >    given IPv4 address is no longer universal and stable over long periods."
> 
> IP v. being whatever, 4 or 6, there's a bunch of reasons there's
> virtually no correspondence between a given FQDN and a given IP
> address nowadays. E.g. CDNs.

There are many reasons that globally inconsistent DNS RRsets exist, e.g.
load balancers, CDNs, split [horizon] DNS, etc. I think split horizon is
a specific type of global inconsistency that doesn't necessarily
encompass the other types.

-- 
Robert Edmonds

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email