IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] BCP on rrset ordering for round-robin? Also head's up on bind 9.12 bug (sorting rrsets by default)

Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> Mon, 18 June 2018 21:14 UTC

Return-Path: <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
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 11D5A130E47 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:14:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 ho4sUTg7oKXs for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:14:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from albireo.enyo.de (albireo.enyo.de [5.158.152.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D82E6130E51 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:14:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.17.203.2] (helo=deneb.enyo.de) by albireo.enyo.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1fV1TO-0008Dh-4D; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:14:02 +0000
Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <fw@deneb.enyo.de>) id 1fV1TN-0001Jh-Uu; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 23:14:01 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <CAKC-DJimMOtNCSE95kRs6Dy3dC_mxB=8O2WVA7badp8GK2ci-Q@mail.gmail.com> <20180615171231.GF1126@mx4.yitter.info> <CAHPuVdWP=DVj52diWYTHKqHBET0hFyUWvACT-VpH20iKzed-ww@mail.gmail.com> <CA+nkc8AS6+cZfi_NGT2T+FeQkQ5fKn--HQOOuusL1cYFkdKbKA@mail.gmail.com> <20180615195232.GA5926@jurassic> <CAKC-DJhRJwg7cw8iexCgq9axgjyjnQQaXP2+wD4u=sk3PtypRg@mail.gmail.com> <20180618150157.GB9377@mx4.yitter.info> <5B27EFB7.1020400@redbarn.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 23:14:01 +0200
In-Reply-To: <5B27EFB7.1020400@redbarn.org> (Paul Vixie's message of "Mon, 18 Jun 2018 18:45:27 +0100")
Message-ID: <874lhzu7ae.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/h0rBtUI4jZGkSHMed08UsEjR3HU>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] BCP on rrset ordering for round-robin? Also head's up on bind 9.12 bug (sorting rrsets by default)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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, 18 Jun 2018 21:14:08 -0000

* Paul Vixie:

> in other words we should re-order rrsets by default, so that very few 
> people or agents are ever prone to think their order is stable. the spec 
> says they are unordered, but human nature says, expect more of what 
> you're seeing.

But the client has to sort them again based on shared prefix length
with its own address.  I think we should fix that as well, otherwise
the overall protocol disadvantages new entrants who cannot get a
contiguous prefix in which they can place all their load balancer
endoints, so that they are immune from that mandatory client sorting.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email