On Aug 10, 2017, at 5:48 PM, Markus Stenberg <markus.stenb...@iki.fi> wrote:
> - 3.3
> - it implies that homenet exposes DNS outside home (by default?) and uses 
> instead custom dns server logic to handle .home.arpa from ‘outside’; why not 
> just firewall it and be done with it (or listen only on e.g. ULA prefix)

No, it doesn't say that.

> - why filter out global IPs?

Because if you don't, then when you lose your global prefix, you lose access to 
your printer.

> - 3.5 (PVD madness)
> - WHY? can’t we get just rid of split horizon DNS madness and use _a_ DNS 
> instead of N DNS servers?

If you tell me how to implement that, I will be excited.   Otherwise, not 
solving this problem will produce brokenness.   The simplest way to solve it is 
to have the network advertise only one external prefix on the homenet if the 
homenet is multiply-homed.   Is that your preferred solution?

Also, this isn't necessarily split-horizon madness.   It's valid for the same 
query to yield different answers; this is operationally normal, and trying to 
do something to stop it in homenet isn't going to work.   Like you, I would 
prefer to do CDNs in a way that doesn't involve all of this brokenness, but if 
you want to watch Netflix on your homenet, we need to make this work.

> - round-robin = bad (think why happy eyeballs came up for example of why)

DNS resolvers use round-robining.   That's how the protocol works.   I can 
think of ways to improve on that, but they all involve changing the DNS packet 
format.   So I don't think that's in scope.   The draft just specifies how DNS 
round robining should work in the context of mpvd on a homenet—it didn't invent 
it.

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to