IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] Server selection document is "band-aid" not solution

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Thu, 17 November 2011 05:26 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.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 9892211E8116 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:26:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.296
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.296 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.303, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lhJ6tN3wNvKi for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:26:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0634F11E810A for <mif@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:26:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.46]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01A1B20CFA for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:26:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend2.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.161]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:26:30 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :references:to; s=smtpout; bh=RCUH7ARPbI7YyTZDhXb+WVdzz/4=; b=po Xj0JOkvrlXtA/MXTIN6bepbMUUd9aZMf2A9UjxrGjSTZy241RlJS7fqTExusQTsc fQ23GLsoDL8U8fExeqLAM918Bt6u+NDYMgfXxhKP4iozmd17JPHq1SQF2LoicFwP RDgKnmAymaNFB70rSvwWcjqy0K5PeIDXGWmsV1Dk4=
X-Sasl-enc: ShbOlYMMcDCVBeZu9NxyIFyOsin8TvB5kwyn5Usg+H06 1321507589
Received: from [192.168.1.16] (host65-16-145-177.birch.net [65.16.145.177]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4FA34482490; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:26:29 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <4EC46D52.8030909@ogud.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:26:28 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DB9F0066-1B81-4CC6-BCE3-2DE103558220@network-heretics.com>
References: <4EC46D52.8030909@ogud.com>
To: Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: mif@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mif] Server selection document is "band-aid" not solution
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: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 05:26:31 -0000

On Nov 16, 2011, at 9:11 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote:

> 
> I sorry for the late comment but it has taken me a while to be able to put my finger on what I feel is wrong with the document (and the discussion in the working group)
> 
> If a node has multiple interfaces and the interfaces have different resolution contexts then the basic question is
> "How can the services on the node tell what resolution context an application wants to use ?"
> 
> Right now the "server-selection" document
> The fundamental problem we have is that OS's have a built in assumptions that
> a) there is only one resolution context i.e. only single /etc/resolv.conf

It's not just that.  A fundamental design choice of DNS is that there is only one resolution context.  Yes, it's not unusual for that design choice to be violated.  But that still doesn't make it right for MIF to violate it.

Keith

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email