IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Linux & draft-gont-6man-slaac-dns-config-issues

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 24 March 2015 13:26 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE0CD1A1A9E for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 H4l-7h2p0gdL for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:26:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x22a.google.com (mail-ie0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85F571A1A68 for <6man@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:26:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iedm5 with SMTP id m5so60062108ied.3 for <6man@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:26:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=cgtPViTS2nr/jSlLZ3i1UFGzVsJO4fvHXYEgE6toJnQ=; b=hLi7gDksv+Rk+4D4+wRit5cd1gV8RSrMNnS3Bjq8SD6SKYkLS0Xt9XOeB5ROlnG9qW ZO659eA9s97CUP8Fjw3BNh2Qw9wEpXTpzM/D9rwMgZ5wc1F7bu/+KshQQZW/F+XePI4v YSBGXCdJHBIz5ixqV0sdshKoKOiaagVT106ov4HyhJbRCAfxX4469qEp/yE6S5S/4gBz PsyIe8SETFeuiTOEsyiFyeTCQ0rvQ+j+pZTulPJFVNcp+bxsDZE9nRbZ/fK+hGoakA4k wKSUhvgf1VaE71C6Iz9wZvw9XdEM+gn9Ji6QjYNck7DWCIWj3hWQ7leTZTi+X2bJ9eDg Z6dw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=cgtPViTS2nr/jSlLZ3i1UFGzVsJO4fvHXYEgE6toJnQ=; b=IeIL8KNux/hr3SS5hjn4Q1ocMYz0oP2845ByCcUb0OSAjCfiP1hE3bTMelVZZdAQUi r3lDjveEI9gSeZ1duWKDB95rBuKQxf6GZ6e6tLjmVfCfbez+CRvOrmlLAJMiOGA81SSH XqX3wQdxyE3ao7RthxiWE4xAegT9Vi+IDfanq1JuyuOAoKIsjAB/Ofu763/txNdX2aVC M9gWPjZ4bbCICv2qyb/yIv05oVoXyZWM0MLZkqDxQkJEuo8dkCynbygDqzgRYAnl/+df x20esOvY1PuHRN9AhvcagOV/fH0LJnkc3GNDcNRoeNXicy6L7psqkUdJHPhTyN4Vj3mU Bgpw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmJ6SXPZ8EU1c9T0i1ZlOe/bZmcTuzqeaZ1gjfCad8HZ3YpGdB1lIgXi452nfxUvbcaX0VX
X-Received: by 10.50.9.97 with SMTP id y1mr22173696iga.34.1427203597942; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:26:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.195.75 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 06:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2XfeSuQAj94kN1AF_8cet2L+uEkJnO59NyYgtwyfXu7A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <55102C6B.1060608@si6networks.com> <CAKD1Yr2XfeSuQAj94kN1AF_8cet2L+uEkJnO59NyYgtwyfXu7A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 08:26:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr3YBdjSkwgoAzTXs_dvoiRnSFReE5-fAO7RggvVLwDthw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Linux & draft-gont-6man-slaac-dns-config-issues
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1130c4c87a6afb051208bbc0"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/G8rEKknBvkTHA4bWfSuRozwmgLg>
Cc: draft-gont-6man-slaac-dns-config-issues@tools.ietf.org, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 13:26:40 -0000

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
> wrote:
>
>> This is how Linux fixes this problem (client-side) in Network Manager:
>>
>> *
>> <
>> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/commit/?id=c0d2ad580748a7305bdf882911be3d2a18b6cfc0
>> >
>> *
>> <
>> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/commit/?id=c0048e7b40d5fe6243253179d749d8b7a30179eb
>> >
>>
>
> Limiting the maximum duration of DNS servers announced in the RA seems
> like a clear bug in the spec. We should fix that.
>

To clarify: I mean that we should just strike the text that specifies that
the maximum duration SHOULD be <= 2x the router advertisement interval.
That doesn't make sense to me.

Yes, it's possible that the router lifetime in the RA will expire while the
DNS servers have not yet expired, but there might be another route via
another unexpired router. Nothing else in the RA has such strict
requirements on lifetimes - for example, RIOs have their own lifetimes, and
so do PIOs; both can and usually are longer than the RA interval. Why
should RDNSS be different?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email