[mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF
GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com> Thu, 31 January 2013 06:56 UTC
Return-Path: <phdgang@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CA2221F86FB for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:56:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ToYry6YlYUCS for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:56:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qe0-f43.google.com (mail-qe0-f43.google.com [209.85.128.43]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10EEF21F86F4 for <mif@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:56:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qe0-f43.google.com with SMTP id 3so562985qeb.2 for <mif@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:56:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=hOQl2Rnk2axYmooLg6/gpL+FeWFBdDWK6aMQFevSk7c=; b=wZZrR9+P+kebNLrcCAUfN84VC22dtxYS543KlxnmzvGHU396M8GSuD9qDWcDrrRRdq 7yASlg+vI7NGCQF+Kg0XFQcWcg0stCXRDj2zjO7jYYzKqz50rR4ipfegfCisKE2aEyuF sC40l/W5zTfDYT1O1d16Fay86uizdvF/GVHBnCsZnLyj46TO2IUpHZngYiu9mxqtm461 uFnH4PF5LryWL1NBm1ddG081LpDLuIAUlQK1yFWL+EjooLxQdxEuM3JsKQ+oc/AtNjMN rcqoI3yyTH66SpE/FRojgBoE8npPgKYd+gHbfjXZVlAq/wHQ+4LtBmEBI+eBMQXNuuuq a4nQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.207.72 with SMTP id fx8mr7822766qab.66.1359615404468; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:56:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.49.48.12 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:56:44 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:56:44 +0800
Message-ID: <CAM+vMERak2vAoYFeSLRep2xjpm480qPjutyv4-tV=KtU0XO=fw@mail.gmail.com>
From: GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com>
To: mif <mif@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension <draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 06:56:45 -0000
Hello all, We would like to follow up the discussions on last IETF meeting. We are asked to add the texts clarifying DNS selections using HE-MIF. With the minutes and my memory, there are two cases HE-MIF failed to help if DNS queries are sent out on multiple interfaces in parallel Case 1: Mismatch of DNS answers with specific provisioning domain A DNS answer may be only valid on a specific provisioning domain, but HE-MIF may not be aware of that mapping because DNS answers may not be kept with the provisioning from which the answer comes. The thing would become worse if asking internal name with public address response or asking public name with private address answers Case 2: Some FQDNs can be resolvable only by sending queries to the right server (e.g., intranet services). Otherwise, a response with NXDOMAIN is replied. HE-MIF would treat the DNS server with fast response as optimal only if there is valid response. That may cause chaos, since NXDOMAIN doesn't provide useful information. Therefore, RFC6731 should be recommended as the proper solution for DNS selections. We are not sure if there is anything missing. Authors would like to ask your kind check and comments. We will update the draft accordingly if there are no further comments. Best Regards Gang
- [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF GangChen
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF GangChen
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Keith Moore
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Keith Moore
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Keith Moore
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Keith Moore
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Michael Richardson
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF GangChen
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF GangChen
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF GangChen
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF GangChen
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF Ted Lemon
- Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF GangChen