Re: [mif] draft-ietf-mif-current-practices-00

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hui Deng [mailto:denghui02@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 7:29 PM
> To: Dave Thaler
> Cc: Dan Wing; Gabriel Montenegro; mif@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [mif] draft-ietf-mif-current-practices-00
> 
> 2nd purpose has been documented in the current practice draft,
> whether 1st and 3rd purpose need to be documented as well? it may not
> directly related to MIF?

Some operating systems -- e.g., most flavors of Unix -- do not support the
ability for sending different DNS queries to different DNS servers.

It would be helpful if the draft more clearly described the functionality.
Someone unfamiliar with the Windows functionality, reading the draft, assumes
it is merely talking about the 'domain search list' -- because that is what
they are familiar with.  

I don't care how the draft is fixed to make it clearer.  I propose describing
the 2 (and, as Dave pointed out, 3) functions.  If you want to adjust the
document to instead talk about the per-interface stuff, that's great -- my
point is that right now it is insufficiently clear in explaining it.

-d

> -Hui
> 
> 2010/4/7 Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Dan Wing [mailto:dwing@cisco.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 11:52 AM
> >> To: Dave Thaler; 'Hui Deng'; Gabriel Montenegro
> >> Cc: mif@ietf.org
> >> Subject: RE: [mif] draft-ietf-mif-current-practices-00
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Dave Thaler [mailto:dthaler@microsoft.com]
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:06 AM
> >> > To: Hui Deng; Dan Wing; Gabriel Montenegro
> >> > Cc: mif@ietf.org
> >> > Subject: RE: [mif] draft-ietf-mif-current-practices-00
> >> >
> >> > Hui is correct, Windows has per-interface DNS server lists
> >> configured.
> >> >
> >> > It then uses a host-wide "effective" server list for an 
> actual query,
> >> > where the effective server list may be different for 
> different names.
> >> >
> >> > On Windows the per-interface suffix is actually termed the
> >> > "connection-specific DNS suffix" to distinguish it from the
> >> > "primary DNS suffix" of the machine.  I think that's why
> >> > "interface-specific" was repeated in the first bullet.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> In draft-montenegro-mif-multihoming, there are two 
> purposes and terms
> >> that
> >> seem to be intermingled using the term "DNS suffix".
> >>
> >> One purpose is the suffix for non-FQDN names, like 
> "payroll" or "mail",
> >> which will have a suffix added to them (e.g., example.com).
> >
> > That's what windows calls the "DNS Suffix Search List" (see the
> > sample output I sent previously below).  It's called the
> > "domain search list" in other places (like RFC 3397), or just
> > "search list" (RFC 1123).
> >
> >> The
> >> other purpose is deciding which DNS server will be be sent 
> a query for
> >> a certain FQDN (e.g., queries for *.example.net go to one 
> DNS server
> >> and queries for *.example.com go to a different DNS server).
> >
> > Another purpose is deciding which DNS server will receive a dynamic
> > update for a name with a certain suffix (e.g., Windows 
> supports dynamic
> > updates for the primary DNS name, and optionally also the 
> connection-
> > specific DNS name of the machine).
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> In draft-ietf-mif-current-practices-00, which is the WG document
> >> that seems to have boiled down draft-montenegro-mif-multihoming,
> >> but draft-ietf-mif-current-practices-00 also does not clearly
> >> separate the two purposes.
> >
> > Yep
> >
> > -Dave
> >>
> >> -d
> >>
> >>
> >> > Example on Windows, extracted from "ipconfig /all" output:
> >> >
> >> > Windows IP Configuration
> >> >
> >> >    Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : dthaler-win7
> >> >    Primary Dns Suffix  . . . . . . . : ntdev.corp.microsoft.com
> >> >    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> >    Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid
> >> >    IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
> >> >    WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
> >> >    DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : ntdev.corp.microsoft.com
> >> >                                        redmond.corp.microsoft.com
> >> >                                        ntdev.microsoft.com
> >> >                                        dns.corp.microsoft.com
> >> >    System Quarantine State . . . . . : Not Restricted
> >> >
> >> > Wireless LAN adapter Wireless Network Connection:
> >> >
> >> >    Connection-specific DNS Suffix  . : hsd1.wa.comcast.net.
> >> >    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> >    Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) Wireless WiFi
> >> > Link 4965AGN
> >> >    Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-1D-E0-34-4F-6F
> >> >    DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
> >> >    Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
> >> >    Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
> >> > fe80::4853:4753:9d8d:3b45%13(Preferred)
> >> >    IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.195(Preferred)
> >> >    Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
> >> >    Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Monday, April 05, 2010
> >> > 10:19:02 PM
> >> >    Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Tuesday, April 06,
> >> > 2010 10:19:02 PM
> >> >    Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
> >> >    DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
> >> >    DHCPv6 IAID . . . . . . . . . . . : 335551968
> >> >    DHCPv6 Client DUID. . . . . . . . :
> >> > 00-01-00-01-12-0C-E2-7A-00-1E-37-CC-8D-DD
> >> >
> >> >    DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 2001:df8:0:1::25
> >> >                                        192.168.0.1
> >> >    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> >    NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
> >> >
> >> > -Dave
> >> >
> >> > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > From: Hui Deng [mailto:denghui02@gmail.com]
> >> > > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:40 PM
> >> > > To: Dan Wing; Gabriel Montenegro; Dave Thaler
> >> > > Cc: mif@ietf.org
> >> > > Subject: Re: [mif] draft-ietf-mif-current-practices-00
> >> > >
> >> > > DNS server always has specific interface related information,
> >> > > but the final DNS server will still be host based, I 
> wouldn't say
> >> it
> >> > > is not correct.
> >> > >
> >> > > one example would be you have internet connection and vpn
> >> connection
> >> > > at the same time,
> >> > > good VPN implementation will always rely on VPN DNS server
> >> > information
> >> > > for Internet connection.
> >> > >
> >> > > -Hui
> >> > >
> >> > > 2010/3/31 Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>:
> >> > > > Section 3.2.1.3 of describes the DNS configuration 
> of Windows,
> >> and
> >> > > says:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >  "Interface specific DNS configuration can be input 
> via static
> >> > > >   configuration or via DHCP.  It includes:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >   o  An interface-specific suffix list.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >   o  A list of DNS server IP addresses."
> >> > > >
> >> > > > It is curious that the first bullet repeats "interface
> >> > specific", but
> >> > > the
> >> > > > second bullet does not repeat it.  A reasonable 
> interpretation is
> >> > > that the
> >> > > > second bullet is not interface-specific, but the 
> lead-in sentence
> >> > > says this is
> >> > > > interface-specific.  I was hoping
> >> > draft-montenegro-mif-multihoming-00
> >> > > would
> >> > > > clarify, but it doesn't.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -d
> >> > > >
> >> > > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > > mif mailing list
> >> > > > mif@ietf.org
> >> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
> >> > > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >