IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] DNS server selection revision under works..

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 12 November 2010 01:09 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: mif@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796BC3A6A99 for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:09:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 bzW-350CoTxQ for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:09:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og111.obsmtp.com (exprod7og111.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.175]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2123A6803 for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:09:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from source ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob111.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTNyT4Oce36tCTPmhZCMXeR7arwHH4kp8@postini.com; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:09:57 PST
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (exchange-10.nominum.com [64.89.228.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "exchange-10.win.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B69C51B9392; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:09:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exchange-10.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.57]) by exchange-10.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.57]) with mapi; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:09:53 -0800
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: "<teemu.savolainen@nokia.com>" <teemu.savolainen@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:09:49 -0800
Thread-Topic: [mif] DNS server selection revision under works..
Thread-Index: AcuCBk83/Wx5msjpQIilUGC7yWssFA==
Message-ID: <C347DD11-93B8-49ED-9D1F-F3D3ABE1BFDA@nominum.com>
References: <18034D4D7FE9AE48BF19AB1B0EF2729F5F05D02AEE@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> <29F4CEED-DB30-4A4B-8CDF-AB43B576DE01@nominum.com> <18034D4D7FE9AE48BF19AB1B0EF2729F5F05D02AF6@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> <5390F566-8150-450B-BD5A-C2636EABE128@nominum.com> <18034D4D7FE9AE48BF19AB1B0EF2729F5F05D6EA16@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> <99962D6D-2626-4B66-B996-DE6FA05B9BF8@nominum.com> <4F099E7F-800E-4F5E-96E5-9BD7FBF23BF2@nishidaya.org> <B21EAB17-ADA5-40FF-AA14-24D636B795F3@nominum.com> <FAEB3290-FF11-499C-AB9B-C3919B95E47B@nishidaya.org> <842EACF2-ADE7-434E-8F64-A5F65AA9893C@nominum.com> <18034D4D7FE9AE48BF19AB1B0EF2729F5F05D6EC7B@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> <41FC18BB-A0E7-4895-98BE-0DB31F1A10C8@nominum.com> <18034D4D7FE9AE48BF19AB1B0EF2729F5F05D6ED0D@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> <9A0B59CC-71D1-40B3-BBDA-C348F17E9D01@nominum.com> <18034D4D7FE9AE48BF19AB1B0EF2729F5F05D6ED22@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> <18034D4D7FE9AE48BF19AB1B0EF2729F5F05D6F039@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <18034D4D7FE9AE48BF19AB1B0EF2729F5F05D6F039@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mif@ietf.org" <mif@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mif] DNS server selection revision under works..
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 01:09:26 -0000

On Nov 12, 2010, at 8:53 AM, <teemu.savolainen@nokia.com> wrote:
> 1) Instead of multiple option instances change to use suboptions similar to DHCPv6 IA_RT
> 
> I think this is needed, but comments welcome if that is good idea or not (I personally couldn't get ISC DHCPv6 client work with multiple DHCPv6 option instances).

I think this is a bug in the ISC client.   Multiple options are supposed to work.   I think the added complexity of an encapsulation is unnecessary.

> 3) Should the DNS suffix list be compressed, like defined in RFC1035 section 4.1.4 or at draft-ietf-mip4-nemo-haaro-02 section 4.2 (dictionary based)? Savings would probably be quite small, but some still.
> 
> Do you think slightly added complexity is worthwhile to compress the suffix list a bit? Essentially repeating labels (.com, .www, etc) would be compressed.

Section 8 of RFC3315 is pretty definite about not doing this... :)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email