IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 01 February 2013 20:11 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.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 57FE921F8FDA for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 12:11:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.068, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 gnvDz5gx8J8R for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 12:11:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og116.obsmtp.com (exprod7og116.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.219]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC0AA21F8FD9 for <mif@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 12:11:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob116.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUQwhb9IU3qn0eC0iPPKo2x3NdfjPHTVJ@postini.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2013 12:11:27 PST
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7653D1B84C8 for <mif@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 12:11:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C3D4190043; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 12:11:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.132]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 12:11:27 -0800
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF
Thread-Index: AQHN/4Aj7tWKNy2hlkOFimKY6NCZjZhl97wA
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 20:11:26 +0000
Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630747479BA9@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
References: <CAM+vMERak2vAoYFeSLRep2xjpm480qPjutyv4-tV=KtU0XO=fw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAM+vMERak2vAoYFeSLRep2xjpm480qPjutyv4-tV=KtU0XO=fw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <764D1CF95ADE12478C3453A7AFF21E94@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: mif <mif@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension <draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [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: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 20:11:28 -0000

On Jan 31, 2013, at 1:56 AM, GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com> wrote:
> Therefore, RFC6731 should be recommended as the proper solution for
> DNS selections.

RFC6731 is only applicable in a very restricted set of use cases, and cannot be counted upon to resolve this issue in the majority of use cases.   I would expect it to be helpful in the case of some enterprise situations (but not with BYOD) and with some mobile handsets (but only for the mobile provider's private domains).   So we simply can't use this to address the problem.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email