ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC 3484 section 6 rule 9 causing more operational problems

2009-03-05 07:06:20
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 02:09:22PM +0000, Tony Finch wrote:
It seems that Vista implements RFC 3484 address selection, including the
requirement to sort IP addresses. This breaks a great deal of operational
dependence on DNS-based load balancing, as well as being based on an
incorrect understanding of how IP addresses are allocated.

RFC 3484 needs to be updated to delete this rule, so that the order
returned from the DNS is honoured when the client has no better knowledge
about which address is appropriate.

See
http://drplokta.livejournal.com/109267.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg51874.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/discuss/current/msg01035.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg05847.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2007/11/msg00029.html

The issue is mentioned in:

http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id/draft-arifumi-6man-rfc3484-revise-00.txt

"2.5.  To disable or restrict RFC 3484 Section 6 Rule 9

   There was a discussion at v6ops and ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists 
that
   the rule 9 of the destination address selection has a serious adverse
   effect on the round robin DNS technique...."

However the above has expired.  Perhaps Arifumi will issue a new version
before the upcoming cutoff.

-- 
Tim


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf