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

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Paul Vixie:
> 
>>>> some number of vendors have depended on revenue from selling this
>>>> feature but i'd say that only a small number of sites ever saw any
>>>> benefit from it.
>>> pool.ntp.org, security.debian.org, rsync.gentoo.org,
>>> [a-o].ns.spamhaus.org, [a-n].surbl.org.  In general the "large RRset"
>>> approach is used by those who do not buy special DNS appliance to serve
>>> their zones, I think.
>> i'm not sure we're in the same discussion.  pool.ntp.org is using short
>> ttl and silent truncation and round robin.  there's no geo-ip stability
>> that could be hurt by client-side reordering or rerandomizing.
> 
> The NTP issue is rather specific and affected ntpd when you had
> 
> server pool.ntp.org
> server pool.ntp.org
> server pool.ntp.org
> 

In your case it should read

server de.pool.ntp.org iburst
server de.pool.ntp.org iburst
server de.pool.ntp.org iburst

but that can result in your getting the same IP address for each of them
which is a problem particularly if you have remembered the last query.
Use of the new config option

pool de.pool.ntp.org iburst

would avoid that since it uses up to 10 IP addresses for NTP servers to
use from the list of IP addresses returned by the one getaddrinfo()
query. Here too you want to avoid any kind of preferred order. The use
of more than one returned address completely obviates the need for
RFC3484 which somehow assumes that you are only going to use one address.

Section 6 assumes prior knowledge of the addresses returned, either by
the O/S or the application. For example, Rule 1 talks about unreachable
addresses, but we won't know if they are unreachable unless we try that
address or have some OOB means of knowing and in any case are they
temporarily unreachable or permanently unreachable? Rule 3 talks about
deprecated addresses. What's that and how would anyone know if an
address is deprecated? Also if it is deprecated why is the DNS returning it?

Danny

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]