IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] PI [ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks]

Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-3a@u-1.phicoh.com> Sat, 31 May 2014 21:55 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-bBB316E3E@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBFC81A00F0 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 May 2014 14:55:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_I_LETTER=-2] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VADCTbZfPPjU for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 May 2014 14:55:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo6.hq.phicoh.net [IPv6:2001:888:1044:10:2a0:c9ff:fe9f:17a9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865691A00DF for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 31 May 2014 14:55:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (Smail #91) id m1WqrFK-0000BHC; Sat, 31 May 2014 23:55:22 +0200
Message-Id: <m1WqrFK-0000BHC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
From: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-3a@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-bBB316E3E@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <43BB867C-7BCA-45F6-8ADC-A49B34D6C0DC@nominum.com> <5384937A.90409@foobar.org> <m2iooq4oqi.wl%randy@psg.com> <5385762E.5020901@dougbarton.us> <5385AA97.1050207@fud.no> <53864DCB.5070202@gmail.com> <53865EA2.9000502@fud.no> <02dc01cf7c06$cc6a4bc0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <97390E9C-460F-4D08-AFCE-E4A991E2B0E4@cisco.com> <46D22F62-3528-4B9D-9FCF-C9C7466A9ABA@delong.com> <20140531104145.GQ46558@Space.Net> <m1WqqZ4-0000DqC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20140531214908.10FEE1719BB4@rock.dv.isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:49:08 +1000 ." <20140531214908.10FEE1719BB4@rock.dv.isc.org>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 23:55:22 +0200
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/JjkUYMWeIQBuIMh3RHqyeZez_F0
Subject: Re: [v6ops] PI [ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks]
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 21:55:29 -0000

In your letter dated Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:49:08 +1000 you wrote:
>You have UPDATE + TSIG or SIG(0).  This is basically what Microsoft
>do with Active Directory except they use GSS-TSIG for about 15 years
>now.  UPDATE and DNSSEC just work and have for over a decade now.
>Happy Eyeballs has proved that you don't need change the DNS for
>link state changes.  IPv4 vs IPv6 is no different to PA1 vs PA2.
>HE is all about the client working around a dead link.

My router is going to update DNS using UPDATE + TSIG? How does my router know
then names of my servers (or the actual addresses)?

Are servers going update themselves?

Is any of that spelled out?

I have no idea what software you are using, but only a tiny fraction of
the software I'm using actually uses happy eyeballs. 

You suggest that every possible piece of software should implement HE?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email