Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operational problems
Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> Wed, 04 March 2009 16:30 UTC
Return-Path: <nweaver@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFF1A3A6CE1; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 08:30:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.255
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.255 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.044, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Or9B9qq+kSQy; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 08:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU [192.150.186.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0FB13A6CD7; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 08:30:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (fruitcake [192.150.186.11]) by fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (8.12.11.20060614/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n24GUcNc024426; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 08:30:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <9DDF93CB-14D8-4A24-9DFD-7C86700BF966@icsi.berkeley.edu>
From: Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU>
To: Ondřej Surý <ondrej.sury@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <e90946380903040805v15ad9e7dv92491667cd1f7656@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Subject: Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operational problems
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 08:31:04 -0800
References: <alpine.LSU.2.00.0903041400220.8701@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <20563.1236179832@nsa.vix.com> <e90946380903040805v15ad9e7dv92491667cd1f7656@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:25:59 -0800
Cc: Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU>, ietf@ietf.org, Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org>, alto@ietf.org, Namedroppers <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:30:33 -0000
I've added the ALTO mailing list to this discussion: What it comes down to is you want "localization", not RFC 3484. On Mar 4, 2009, at 8:05 AM, Ondřej Surý wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org> wrote: >> dns-based load balancing is an unfortunate overloading and >> should never be done. > > Here I agree. > >> RFC 3484 is correct as it is. > > Here I don't. The idea behind is good, the implementation is not. > Client would have to know BGP path to DA + DB and decide on > basis of routing protocol. Selection based on longest matching > prefix will work in only very small percent of case, all other cases > are based on pure luck. If a localization service is available, querying it to get the "Best match" would be most appropriate. the ALTO group in the IETF is looking at such issues, primarily with respect to P2P, but elsewhere as well [1]. In the absence of localization, probably the best is "If prefix is almost identical, use it, otherwise select random", because address is almost irelevent for localization beyond the current network these days, but having the standard specify "select randomly" has some general benefits when localization is not available. [1] In retrospect, I take back my comment about "should focus on P2P", localization may very well indeed be a more generic primitive.
- RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operationa… Tony Finch
- Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operat… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operat… Tony Finch
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Tony Finch
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Tony Finch
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Tony Finch
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Tony Finch
- RE: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Christian Huitema
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Florian Weimer
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Ondřej Surý
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Paul Vixie
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Tony Finch
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Tony Finch
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Mark Andrews
- Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operat… Jari Arkko
- Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operat… Tim Chown
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Tony Finch
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… bmanning
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Chris Thompson
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Florian Weimer
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Florian Weimer
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Florian Weimer
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Ondřej Surý
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Ondřej Surý
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Paul Vixie
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Paul Vixie
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Paul Vixie
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Tony Finch
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Paul Vixie
- Re: [dnsext] RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing mo… Paul Vixie
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Paul Vixie
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Danny Mayer
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Ask Bjørn Hansen
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Florian Weimer
- Re: [dnsext] Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causin… Danny Mayer
- Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operat… Arifumi Matsumoto