Re: [netlmm] Review of LMA Discovery document

Behcet Sarikaya <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com> Fri, 30 April 2010 19:37 UTC

Return-Path: <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEB483A68EC for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.723, BAYES_50=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8u0rRdI6zZBx for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web111402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (web111402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [67.195.15.138]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A35BF3A6BBD for <netlmm@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 93322 invoked by uid 60001); 30 Apr 2010 19:37:03 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1272656223; bh=6kpNAmX8cHrEpY/8uHLk6oevqBr6UkihqhGwQiokvN4=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=wBJO1uUxiUib5KzmlGKOrLlYy3qCAZDhAjJwv4QuW2HDSdqrGAKnIzYdocLe8cSVCtxJJgTe/ilACvfLDc2VovnXTVziNAUsNI6oCXmk+EkstF6aOwQqrJj2MY/hKgTSw+GHMNz4w/3460cMTBc+jvqUqZU3UeLGEkl7EWN4UMw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=T032r3HZE5TWUW485PFHSANOESRZR+9nN8t12PkdQDjC0gaOG7VmG9R0KW88GwQ4TMfGqFPgPgF6pJDdApDuIQ6ca2APjk+tXM5Ltl9AHJJ47Ou1HaP9Mx8yu7SJ3kz2RYTNJu3RQkfKB3y6FD6J3ABGXBwRM7oJcCLJMVKI9VM=;
Message-ID: <551716.75965.qm@web111402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
X-YMail-OSG: BFU4WuAVM1mrVXu7dT4AONgSnkDBp6lt.gVGlat949s3u2f NwBGvQ1AyHOBO6_2UTx2UYIh8MNZy3NNnAzYt383oNn2d4WDtnyTzFg3ulLf MB83JiixV06uDkLQqYUcjs2am.RV1xJmmUOIed5tjDh4dMh2ju_OYNogtE77 C_x1mZ0c7sW0ZcxPNci5XLryWXFBMRcW1I_RstAmkSNafdfXDbJqa25qla8p ZYn0MmW3n7fINDodn_5weG..vo7uFHisGN2X_4p6tRJaJ0Ww_pwzWzZWIdK6 MYp1QpLl0z2gED1jKajULwq4Tn.HctorfDmeo4tKPMRT9EFH62lQbsbfNQrR fD_krx6NzmKvlBt0Xbg--
Received: from [206.16.17.212] by web111402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:37:03 PDT
X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/348.5 YahooMailWebService/0.8.103.269680
References: <457704EB-5997-4BD9-A455-0E4912ADBFFC@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:37:03 -0700
From: Behcet Sarikaya <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com>
To: Christian Vogt <christian.vogt@ericsson.com>, NETLMM Mailing List <netlmm@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <457704EB-5997-4BD9-A455-0E4912ADBFFC@ericsson.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: jouni korhonen <jounikor@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [netlmm] Review of LMA Discovery document
X-BeenThere: netlmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>
List-Id: NETLMM working group discussion list <netlmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netlmm>
List-Post: <mailto:netlmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 19:37:24 -0000

Hi Christian,

  The way DNS is used in the draft is how an ordinary host makes a DNS query.

  This is no DNS based LMA discovery. I think you (and Julien) had already indicated this in your mails to the list earlier. RFC 5026-like DNS discovery has been described in our draft as we had indicated many times in the list.  In fact DNS based LMA discovery in PMIPv6 is much more secure and efficient that MIPv6 DNS discovery of HAs.

My suggestion is to drop totally Section 4 as this section is artificial without a real DNS discovery solution and instead merge draft-sarikaya-netlmm-lma-dnsdiscovery-01


with this draft.

Regards,

Behcet
----- Original Message ----
> From: Christian Vogt <christian.vogt@ericsson.com>
> To: NETLMM Mailing List <netlmm@ietf.org>
> Cc: jouni korhonen <jounikor@gmail.com>
> Sent: Thu, April 29, 2010 4:53:40 PM
> Subject: [netlmm] Review of LMA Discovery document
> 
> Folks,

Jouni asked me to review the LMA Discovery document.  I did 
> this, and
found that the document is mature and well written, and should 
> be
progressed further as soon as possible.  I have just one comment 
> on
section 4:

Section 4 gives two classes of reasons not to use the 
> DNS for LMA
discovery.  The first class is related to update propagation 
> latencies
caused by caching.  The second class is related to update 
> latencies
caused by primary-to-secondary server synchronization.  My 
> comment
relates to the first class of reasons:

Can't the issues 
> described be well avoided?  In deployments where the
DNS is to be used 
> for LMA discovery, make sure you have DNS
implementations that accept low 
> TTLs, and set your TTLs low -- that
seems to be it.  I agree that the 
> issues you are describing do need to
be considered, and hence it is very 
> important to document them.  But I
personally don't see them as 
> show-stoppers.

This said, your second class of reasons may be more 
> intractable.

Hope this helps.  Best regards,

- 
> Christian

_______________________________________________
netlmm 
> mailing list
> href="mailto:netlmm@ietf.org">netlmm@ietf.org
> href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm" target=_blank 
> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm