Subject: Re: [dnsop] Re: Root Anycast (fwd)

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 19:48:35 -0400 (EDT)

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, John Brown CT wrote:

> Couple of points here.
> 
> 1. Typical DNS queries are via UDP, not TCP.
>     Thus the noise Dean is making here about things breaking
>     because of TCP issues, is well  noise.

Noise about TCP, yes.

>     Keep in mind that DNS queries are UDP.  The query and the response.
>     so a typical query is 2 packets, the ask and the answer.
>
>     Having DNS be based on TCP would NOT scale very well.  

We know. As you point out, TCP is still used.  

> Think about
>     it.  Before I could even make a query I would have to deal with
>     at least 3 packets for the TCP connection setup.  Then I'd send my
>     query, which would also have an TCP ACK sent as well, oh then there
>     is the answer to the query, with yet another TCP ACK.  So a single
>     DNS query would (at a min) take 7 packets, more likely 8 to 10,
>     thats 400 to 500 percent more traffic than via UDP.

We know. But people still propose things that will take big packets or 
DNSSEC, etc.

>     DNS uses TCP in special cases. Some of them, but not all of them
>     are.  1. Packet size, 2. AXFR, 3. I think TSIG / DNS SeC stuff
> 
>     Now before Dean jumps on the See, AXFR is broke, lets understand that
>     AXFR doesn't happen for anycasted root servers on their PUBLIC facing
>     IP address.  AXFR is typically going to happen on a globally unique
>     IP assigned to each specific Anycast'd host.  Thus TCP works just
>     fine.

Yes, I'll accept that roots can be updated via means other than AXFR and
updated via other than anycasted IP addresses.

> 
> 2. This "single router requirement" is an interesting comment.  I've not
>     seen this in any RFC or BCP.  Is there one ??  I'd hope not.

A BCP/RFC for what?  You mean anycast? I don't know if it is in the RFC
describing anycast.  However, that is obviously a requirement, as pointed
out previously by others.

>     Having muliple routers in a mesh format is good.  That means if one
>     router fails the other can take the traffic.

No doubt.

>     Keep in mind that from a packet path forwarding decision process,
>     these routers are speaking other protocols as well.  There is dynamic
>     information being shared between these closely coupled routers that
>     lets them do the right thing.

Really?  And what protocols are those?

		--Dean

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:24:00 -0400 (EDT)

John Brown (a latecoming VOIP "expert" and self-described "radical") 
wrote:
> I realize that many on this list don't reply to the troll food that Dean 
> leaves around, but I felt it important to reply as someone thats NOT in
> any shape fashion or form, ISC or its staff.   I am somone that has done 
> the engineering work to make a different letter work better via Anycast.
> Which letter, well that doesn't matter.

Perhaps this is part of the "troll food" John is talking about:  

[the issue below turned out to be genuine abuse of Dr. Bernstein in
violation of the code of conduct, and indeed in violation of common
decency, but John Brown promoted that abuse as well. The group of
Bernstein abusers then was also associated with ISC and Paul Vixie. This
rather refutes the claim made above by John that he is "NOT in any shape
fashion or form, ISC or its staff"]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 17:47:21 -0700
From: John M. Brown <[email-masked]>
To: 'D. J. Bernstein' <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: RE: namedroppers mismanagement, continued

[ post by non-subscriber.  with the massive amount of spam, it is easy to
  miss and therefore delete mis-posts.  so fix subscription addresses! ]

Dan, sounds like a plan.  I say all messages from
Bernstein be handled via his option #2

Can we please BOUNCE all of Dr. Bernsteins email with
the correct procedure, in the bounce message, on how
to subscribe and be a participating member of the list
instead of bitching and wasting time.

If you have specific complaints about the List Manager
then forward them, in private, to the NomCom.

This list is NOT the place for this bitch fest.  

Now lets get back to something more important like
arguing over DNS SEC. ;)

Jeesh, what a waste...