IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] comment on draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Tue, 12 November 2013 19:41 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.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 420DC21F9EF2 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:41:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.426
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.173, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 zUGagnLqwQW1 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:41:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E1C711E810B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:41:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1484; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1384285293; x=1385494893; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=YuJmfCgblJPGsulbzwOEi+QIVXmkrzxNKq47QB4RAHw=; b=U0BixnBfmRGszVS8XQXNe87bQAgBLo/bCZN0J1heENIS01Zo6LJJkxRV QnpAXvBp+1P1/BexJmtb/WGGIzUiG7HYIik1UD0Bm/lWlrHAKMZMLl5XZ CUxWQe7EaIjXSh0DIK0UY+Z0I5YATgDReCc05gy0maNY4jklTJL0tAIXU U=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 195
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag4FABmEglKtJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABagweBC78XgSoWdIIlAQEBAwFxCAULAgEIRiERJQIEDgUOh2EDCQa1Tg2JZYxtgnIHgyCBEQOQMIEwhESBa4xShTiDJoIq
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.93,687,1378857600"; d="asc'?scan'208"; a="283878818"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Nov 2013 19:41:30 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com [173.36.12.80]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rACJfUgn022493 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Nov 2013 19:41:30 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.122]) by xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com ([173.36.12.80]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 13:41:30 -0600
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] comment on draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis
Thread-Index: AQHO398uW9KL+QiutECzeTNuuK2QhA==
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 19:41:29 +0000
Message-ID: <21C0A698-E56B-4B0B-8454-1323027AD04E@cisco.com>
References: <CAFU7BAR3C8FwU49CsWua20Tmz24Jzd6UVuN=Aoea8Z03drvELQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALo9H1b1EFtjExsy89gLtPmWPoYc1DqmigfLrybPdxm0OsKKdw@mail.gmail.com> <52793827.2040708@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52793827.2040708@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.121]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_52E5B816-78F1-44A1-AA0D-66F4E2773CF5"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] comment on draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 19:41:53 -0000

On Nov 5, 2013, at 10:25 AM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> No, but that's not what he means. He means split DNS, where
> the internal DNS server includes records that are not present
> in the external DNS server. That, like it or not, is standard
> practice today in many enterprise networks.

</chair>

I'm told that it goes beyond that. There are at least three "directions" in the split:
   - inside, where internal-only names are advertised, might use an internal-only prefix, and even "outside" names might have different servers and different addresses.
   - outside, where internal-only names are not advertised
   - partner, which is "outside" plus some names made accessible to the partner, and may imply some form of b2b routing as well.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email