Re: [mif] [dnsext] 2nd Last Call for MIF DNS server selection document

Teemu,

I don't believe this is a topic where consensus in MIF is very relevant.
It needs to be decided in a much wider community rather than as a subsidiary
question in a MIF document. I suggest leaving it FFS (for further study)
in MIF.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 2011-10-20 20:01, teemu.savolainen@nokia.com wrote:
> Hi Ray,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ext Ray Bellis [mailto:Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk]
>> Sent: 19. lokakuuta 2011 13:40
>> To: Savolainen Teemu (Nokia-CTO/Tampere)
>> Cc: <denghui02@hotmail.com>; <mif@ietf.org>; <dnsext@ietf.org>;
>> <dnsop@ietf.org>; <dhcwg@ietf.org>; <pk@isoc.de>;
>> <john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dnsext] [mif] 2nd Last Call for MIF DNS server selection
>> document
>>
>> I have concerns about §4.6:
>>
>> "A bare name (a name without any dots) MUST be first treated as a pre-
> DNS
>> hostname, and only after that the name SHALL be appended with  domain
>> information and described DNS server selection logic be  utilized."
>>
>> When new gTLDs are introduced it is likely for brand-name gTLDs that they
>> will wish to use bare names in the DNS (i.e. a single label hostname) for
> their
>> primary web sites.
>>
>> Hence bare names may become much more frequently used as DNS names,
>> and §4.6 wouldn't permit those to work unless '.' is also in the suffix
> list.
>> I'd like to hear the authors' thoughts on these.  I'm not sure that this
> draft
>> necessarily needs any significant changes - it may only require changes to
>> ensure that bare names are also considered as potential DNS names in their
>> own right.
> 
> Okay, I understand there is no clear consensus yet how these single label
> names should be handled by the resolvers at the first place? Should resolver
> first treat them as pre-DNS hostnames, then as DNS hostnames, and then try
> search list? The DNS server selection logic would be applied already when
> resolving single label name, i.e. the network could provide a single label
> domain "brand" in the domains list.
> 
> Maybe section 4.6 could be like this, perhaps (changes in second paragraph
> and title)?
> --
> 4.6.  Interactions with DNS search lists and single label hostnames
> 
>    A node may be configured with DNS search list by DHCPv6
>    OPTION_DOMAIN_LIST [RFC3646] or DHCPv4 Domain Search Option
>    [RFC3397].
> 
>    A bare name (a name without any dots) MUST be first treated as a pre-
>    DNS hostname, after which resolution of the name SHALL be attempted
>    with DNS, and as a last resort the name SHALL be appended with
>    domain information. DNS server selection logic SHALL be 
>    utilized for both of the latter two DNS using methods.
> 
>    Resolution for the name containing any dots SHOULD first be attempted
>    with DNS servers of all interfaces.  Only if the resolution fails the
>    node SHOULD append the name with search list domain(s) and then again
>    utilize improved DNS server selection algorithm to decide which DNS
>    server(s) to contact.
> --
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 	Teemu
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> mif@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif