IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] RFC 6731 implementations

Margaret Cullen <mrcullen42@gmail.com> Thu, 03 November 2022 17:33 UTC

Return-Path: <mrcullen42@gmail.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 20A90C1522A7 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 10:33:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.855
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.855 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QRpudtPyTDYQ for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 10:33:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41E77C14CE3F for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2022 10:33:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com with SMTP id o8so1609246qvw.5 for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 03 Nov 2022 10:33:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=WYTQGSQ46B36IF3OtC4Q+gJ+xbD7aProlO7rtFTsREE=; b=pByBrmd3zjLqmAHAHFiSKa9gndYw/LCuK/PJZ8TsO0kX/IV2Cd3cho33+aNr14Cb3M 3lidmp7oEyv8h2PiQ0nZDs7/fr+T2Qz39HPZDGbBLFMCa2ng9cdyDc3AVMxPEyBH82dl QuvHeSJOlrUvyZywv7NP5VFhZego4OBWrsLucVL0lWGknDccE9BcVnQyGfhg2dq7gpq9 O4qzxuOZrzOrjmeQOrkPtNH0F/2E1Tz6wKqHF2rzuwtgBL39UoWngaJNi3AaJH1UeUhf Uoe/9ETHq9IJs0YeVZgv4VTt00FuH22w0Ti37q8XtPq5yDk3XjX80Xrg/RUWMCa9etSd c1aQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=WYTQGSQ46B36IF3OtC4Q+gJ+xbD7aProlO7rtFTsREE=; b=T4tJ7TnZSI1+5RqntIqLdVTFCrdpmXrc2gw4eKQRfMvyPPKwMU7zfarWB/rRzjwvoo 4MgwRmoZJh57aEAj3QZ162MOMay66qWUSOxWjc3LxrJlBvh9cj6L62BIm8YAtK1jXJOx sZPkJRD3wMQxAwZJOOPQSs7Erh4Ugik9M5hNv+b32JIedKxBtE5//OpZbgLECL9cQ7zN 2tkPRfze4tvAblJQyQvnaQGJAr0GWp4uIw6wvMwOFcmz0PXwvJSVNHlvDv4GWFvJ7ESr gzF3hyRlrqxot++tSoAJ8dvI2j2scOheiNgs0b4y1oCiH4/YwywkePalWtQVX08e2tji gT0g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3tlqPTa8BIgUo4kj/AZPtMW5U651MQ7MuCRt/9PP9fB8Zlo3sg N2hUTDKyF54+ANpkhN5tfK2sHGdezdF5OQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM5k+fF1ljzZVTDgm3Nogs2FAgzOGSNyb9uCqUNdyxqhWyIaMDq+8jSEkDD+/EznpraMpdPbSQ==
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5fc5:0:b0:4bb:6360:e80 with SMTP id jq5-20020ad45fc5000000b004bb63600e80mr27421913qvb.63.1667496830826; Thu, 03 Nov 2022 10:33:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2601:18c:502:ea50:5090:bc42:ec9c:e46c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id cx26-20020a05620a51da00b006fa12a74c53sm1122673qkb.61.2022.11.03.10.33.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 03 Nov 2022 10:33:50 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\))
From: Margaret Cullen <mrcullen42@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <83c25827-1211-8c1c-9001-e6cb6fdaaab9@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2022 13:33:49 -0400
Cc: mif@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E6A381F3-3600-48AE-A9BB-116A5907734C@gmail.com>
References: <83c25827-1211-8c1c-9001-e6cb6fdaaab9@redhat.com>
To: Petr Menšík <pemensik@redhat.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mif/oNq6Weo3Tyw5LWCoG3bAfyZI5C8>
Subject: Re: [mif] RFC 6731 implementations
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 03 Nov 2022 17:33:56 -0000

Hi Petr,

There is no successor to this document, and the WG has been closed for some time.

What parts of the specification do you find confusing?  There may be folks on this list who can answer any questions you have.

Margaret
(Former mif co-chair)

> On Nov 3, 2022, at 8:18 AM, Petr Menšík <pemensik@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello former MIF group members,
> 
> I have found RFC 6731 [1], which is Standard Tracks since December 2012. I have found reference to it from some draft of add WG. When I read it, I found it proposes solution to existing problem on Linux desktops, which is not yet sufficiently solved. A bit similar attempt is implemented by systemd-resolved [2], but does not use any standardized way.
> 
> I think every device with multiple interfaces is potential candidate for it. Every laptop with ethernet+wifi, every smart phone with wifi+cellular network. Yet I haven't found any attempts to implement RFC 6731. Do you know existing implementations for any operating system? Is it used somewhere already? Is there a reason why it is not widely used?
> 
> I work in Red Hat as a Software Engineer, maintaining some DNS packages. Dnsmasq has some integration with Network Manager, which does something similar. Yet they are misusing dns-search parameter of DHCP protocol. I would like to add more proper support, but I find current standards confusing. Is there more relevant successor to this standard?
> 
> Best Regards,
> Petr
> 
> 1. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6731.html
> 2. https://systemd.io/RESOLVED-VPNS/
> 
> -- 
> Petr Menšík
> Software Engineer, RHEL
> Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
> PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> mif@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email