[mif] question about draft-montenegro-mif-multihoming-00.txt

marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es> Mon, 16 March 2009 20:58 UTC

Return-Path: <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>
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 5A6A63A69E0 for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.199, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 cTCvXTBFq9yu for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8019A3A688B for <mif@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from marcelo-bagnulos-macbook-pro.local (173.pool85-53-142.dynamic.orange.es [85.53.142.173]) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018836BA9A0 for <mif@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:59:19 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <49BEBDA7.6090509@it.uc3m.es>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:59:19 +0100
From: marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mif <mif@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3116-5.6.0.1016-16524.002
Subject: [mif] question about draft-montenegro-mif-multihoming-00.txt
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: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:58:41 -0000

Hi,

Read the draft, very clear and useful, thanks for writing it.

I only have one clarifying question at this point:

In section 6. DNS Query Behavior it reads:

   The DNS Client service queries the DNS servers in the following
   order:

   1. The DNS Client service sends the name query to the first DNS
     server on the preferred interface's list of DNS servers and waits
     one second for a response.

I understand then that Windows vista still uses the preferred interface 
concept, not for routing but yes for the DNS queries, right?

And the preferred interface is the first one bound to the TCP ip stack 
while booting, right?

So, how this works with dual faced DNS?
I understand that if the dual faced DNS only provides answer for a given 
query over one of the faces, then this works more or less fine cause 
windows retries (i say more or less cause it may result in latency, i guess)

But if the dual faced does provide replies in both faces, but different 
addresses, then how does this works? I mean, i guess it should work 
cause if the answer of the dns query returns for instance a private 
address, then rfc3484 longest prefix match rule will prefer the source 
address with the same scope and will use the interface with the private 
address, is that correct? Is it then accurate to say that the source 
address selection mechanism is used to select the right outgoing 
interface in case the routing table doesn't provide a unique putgoing 
interface? (i mean, the interface selection for outgoing packet would be 
first determined by routing and if the routing doesn't select a single 
interface, then selected based on the source address?)

Regards, marcelo