IETF Logo Mail Archive

[v6ops] Mobile: Happy DNSclientBalls

Thor-Henrik Kvandahl <kvandahl@gmail.com> Thu, 11 January 2018 07:46 UTC

Return-Path: <kvandahl@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 066BF127863 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 23:46:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id apBSdJbfnJhP for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 23:46:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22e.google.com (mail-lf0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4081F12025C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 23:46:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id a12so1646477lfe.13 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 23:46:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Aaf10Z2uHZ38GsjdiyX6Wl6aJ9LNLxBQod4Ed6ThGWw=; b=enc8FxfYLDfbzDmYiY7mI6DUlu2p05nTMWBw0uegQeBvg03fx3hV2JX0BiTnwvq0rk xa5SJ1t03cDfsa3ZOPaLw+VWB6Wur5d1D5NOtH82xdOd+0qPrm02+QhAxmScv2TZ/OnN Kd4PXTCNbgcccFQ7lKh9vBtAS8q732IDMWv7Xz7gudLIfzfM4XRT9lqFBbf2uxym61xC xOauwAYp7aJ3I8UQBJOhS3F30GOyxYaa+v4r+x/ERnzcNEqN59DdbDS88igzW5T2D2jJ mZyFhsaug6M4ViNb8NV4TTSMi5pLvvxtMYprC5dq7xiCvfIEH5vod2EGWCFe3NTYZMtG YTQQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Aaf10Z2uHZ38GsjdiyX6Wl6aJ9LNLxBQod4Ed6ThGWw=; b=SXOXm8aQ4bk3dDMNxh6702ZJa1ZwJNA02nxsRZ4vp8SHIqQguo7/WOxSZLj7yJt+PL APeItiKRw+53hx21i2GkrK48NnXUNnClpkx8Ryhd6ZCwE32/MYlkW9k3VoWaiovy0aaV NbtP1iJRPxI44icq5r09pkPyNk7Q0RfqKogeePHsUGuDOVvQ9EpZ/Nv0wqyTgYly+qby 24oMIFG8judcxseZ17HSlCP+CnBf5zy+MlmMYLHCdRNVSkABBlV0+63zKH0GBZVq1ZqO yj4GWiVi7+7I69+Nb9lz4K/mcLYj2HkmATFU6UyV6dGqU05qpKkFdarUG+VTrDrtje+P hMqg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxyteTRDT9SLMx7TIKrZi2RDqQD8uyErBoxdXlm214qC7Np/0USf8a PQBvgLbRcpZCh5kV7yM4sof4rw8O4V3nVk9pHUQ9Yvs/
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotEl6HuBhCTk3YJjhfXwYDa3b2HiLvA/8bPP536Yxsp3n8zuZESATgF3SgJ8vW0RPdGuLSeZJ0PPXnPj4Z6J2o=
X-Received: by 10.25.76.214 with SMTP id z205mr10835509lfa.134.1515656773212; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 23:46:13 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.179.67.188 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 23:46:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Thor-Henrik Kvandahl <kvandahl@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 08:46:12 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEiR1_k1gbhdiQnv_xHRggJVT3Z2Y8otYv7SYwJD8bfUU3hiSg@mail.gmail.com>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114b0c62919e9a05627b5704"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/NxJPvPLt8EVvlb5mOUzYIOgRYoI>
Subject: [v6ops] Mobile: Happy DNSclientBalls
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 07:46:17 -0000

Hi,



Does anyone know if there are defined requirements on behaviour for the DNS
client on a Mobile Node (MN/UE) connected to a dual stack APN where the
3gpp IE container provisioned both IPv4 and IPv6 name servers?

As far as I know it is up to the UE to prefer between the provisioned name
servers, and I think they should prefer IPv6 name servers.
My Android Oreo and Nougat DNS clients uses only IPv4 for DNS requests and
I think it would be better for the NAT44(4) devices between the PGW and the
resolver if the UE preferred to use the IPv6 name server(s).

If there are no requirements for this, does anyone know the Google policy
for Android on this?

Iphone's seems to prefer the IPv6 name servers.




--
*Thor-Henrik Kvandahl*

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email