Re: [homenet] Status of draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming CFA

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[e-mail]>]

Juliusz Chroboczek <[e-mail]> writes:

>> 1a. Router A exports over HNCP that it supports MPvD. Router B forwards
>>     all queries to router A, using a source address in the same prefix
>>     as the original request was received from.
>
>> 1b. Router A exports over HNCP that it supports MPvD. Router B uses
>>     router A's address (which would need to be routable inside the
>>     homenet, obviously) as the DNS server in RAs.
>
> This has the significant advantage of not requiring a DNS proxy on each
> Homenet router.  It has the disadvantage of not requiring a DNS proxy on
> each Homenet router.
>
> I like it.
>
> (Aside: what's the fallback mode if there's no A in the network?  One
> could either advertise all of the ISPs' DNS servers in RAs, or advertise
> oneself notwithstanding no support for MPvD.  I guess both should be
> allowed.)

Yeah, or fallback to 2 (send queries to all upstreams and reply with the
union to the client). If you don't want to bother being MPvD-aware, you
just set N (the number of upstreams to wait for) to 1, and it turns into
a sort of happy eyeballs for DNS...

> (Second aside: what happens when there are multiple As in the network?
> One could either elect the "master" DNS server, so that all links use the
> same DNS proxy, or let each router pick one at random, so you get load
> balancing.  I guess only one should be allowed.)

I'd say don't bother with an election. All routers with the capability
are eligible as upstreams. Picking one at random is probably fine, but
not sure if we need to specify that? "Pick the first one you see" would
probably also work, as long as you update your choice if that router
goes away...

-Toke