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


To: BELOEIL Luc FTRD/DMI/CAE <luc.beloeil@francetelecom.com>
CC: "Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>, dnsop@cafax.se
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 12:44:00 +0859 ()
In-Reply-To: <C331E5A29B51A84E9755E834A3E619D10F9F7A@ftrdmel1.rd.francetelecom.fr>from BELOEIL Luc FTRD/DMI/CAE at "Jul 31, 2003 05:32:05 pm"
Sender: owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject: Re: avoiding proxies

Luc;

> > > On the Internet, the mechanism to relay requests to servers over
> > > multiple links is called routing.
> > 
> > Exactly, let's let routing do the job it is supposed to be providing
> > already anyway, rather than layering on even more mandatory services.
> > 
> 
> Ok I may understand what do you wanna say. 
> 1- we could use multicast to transport DNS requests. But multicast is
> not easy to deploy within access networks such as xDSL, RTC... (NBMA
> links)

I hope Eric recognizes that ring search with multicast is an
application layer attempt to poorly imitate a routing protocol.

> 2- we could use anycast
> 
> But it is not clear for me how we could use DNSSEC in such scheme. There
> is still and perhaps a bigger issue there if we need to distribute keys.
> (I do not argue that RA-based solution is better there ;+)

Read the draft on security considerations and never say autoconfigured
security.

							Masataka Ohta
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.

Home | Date list | Subject list