Ray Bellis | 2 Sep 10:50 2011
Picon

Homenet WG Interim Meeting Announcement

Fall 2011 Homenet Interim
=========================

October 6th - 7th 2011
Hosted by Comcast.

The HUB, United Plaza, 30 South 17th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103

Statement of goals and scope
----------------------------

The focus of the October Homenet Interim meeting is to harness and
channel current momentum and energy towards a crisp architecture
document as well as the five focus areas defined in the charter.

Primary focus is on meeting our deliverables due by December:

  Sep 2011 - First WG draft on the architecture
  Dec 2011 - First WG draft on prefix configuration
  Dec 2011 - First WG draft on routing

We have included time on the second day for areas with specific
milestones in 2012.

List of Deliverables
--------------------

We expect to make progress on each of our working areas, however the
only official deliverable from the Working Group in terms of documents
(Continue reading)

IESG Secretary | 6 Sep 19:25 2011
Picon

HOMENET WG Interim Meeting Announcement

Fall 2011 Homenet Interim
=========================

October 6th - 7th 2011
Hosted by Comcast.

The HUB, United Plaza, 30 South 17th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103

Statement of goals and scope
----------------------------

The focus of the October Homenet Interim meeting is to harness and
channel current momentum and energy towards a crisp architecture
document as well as the five focus areas defined in the charter.

Primary focus is on meeting our deliverables due by December:

Sep 2011 - First WG draft on the architecture
Dec 2011 - First WG draft on prefix configuration
Dec 2011 - First WG draft on routing

We have included time on the second day for areas with specific
milestones in 2012.

List of Deliverables
--------------------

We expect to make progress on each of our working areas, however the
only official deliverable from the Working Group in terms of documents
(Continue reading)

Brzozowski, John | 9 Sep 19:29 2011
Picon

DNS and IPV6 within the home

Wanted to share something here to get some feedback and to determine if
this is something that is in scope for HOMENET.

Consider the following:

* dual stack home network
* private IPv4
* global IPv6
* local DNS that resolves local hosts, this data is not available
authoritatively on the Internet

My home router supports RFC5006 (not sure the RFC was revised when the
router firmware was developed).  There is an IPv6 DNS server configured on
the router which is transmitted in the router advertisements.

A host on the network supports RFC5006.

When the host attempts lookups for local resources using the global IPv6
DNS server address it recurses to the Internet and never gets the answer
it expects for the local network resources.  The client resolver also
never attempts to contact the local, private IPv4 DNS server since the
IPv6 DNS is technically responding.  Explicit DNS queries to the local,
private DNS servers work but this not really usable.

Ultimately I had to disable DNS over IPv6 to ensure local and Internet
resources are resolvable.

In this case the local IPv4 DNS server is a separate server, frankly I am
not sure if having them be the same device ie the home router would make a
difference.  I suppose this would depend on the router's DNS capabilities.
(Continue reading)

Jari Arkko | 9 Sep 19:58 2011
Picon

Re: DNS and IPV6 within the home

I'm with you with similar setup. But I think this is mostly about being able to configure your border router
with (a) the right DNS server address for DHCPv4 and (b) the right DNS server address for RFC 5006/DHCPv6.
Is your problem that you don't get to do (b)? Or do you skip (a) as well, and then rely on local multicast
naming discovery?

Jari

On 09.09.2011 20:29, Brzozowski, John wrote:
> Wanted to share something here to get some feedback and to determine if
> this is something that is in scope for HOMENET.
>
> Consider the following:
>
> * dual stack home network
> * private IPv4
> * global IPv6
> * local DNS that resolves local hosts, this data is not available
> authoritatively on the Internet
>
> My home router supports RFC5006 (not sure the RFC was revised when the
> router firmware was developed).  There is an IPv6 DNS server configured on
> the router which is transmitted in the router advertisements.
>
> A host on the network supports RFC5006.
>
> When the host attempts lookups for local resources using the global IPv6
> DNS server address it recurses to the Internet and never gets the answer
> it expects for the local network resources.  The client resolver also
> never attempts to contact the local, private IPv4 DNS server since the
> IPv6 DNS is technically responding.  Explicit DNS queries to the local,
(Continue reading)

Teemu Savolainen | 9 Sep 20:07 2011
Picon

Re: DNS and IPV6 within the home

Are the local names having some specific suffix in use, such as ".local" (or just names without dots, like "example")? I was thinking if draft-ietf-mif-dns-server-

select would be of any use, i.e. in this case the DNS server learn with DHCPv4 could be configured to have knowledge of ".local" private namespace...

Teemu

2011/9/9 Brzozowski, John <John_Brzozowski <at> cable.comcast.com>
Wanted to share something here to get some feedback and to determine if
this is something that is in scope for HOMENET.

Consider the following:

* dual stack home network
* private IPv4
* global IPv6
* local DNS that resolves local hosts, this data is not available
authoritatively on the Internet

My home router supports RFC5006 (not sure the RFC was revised when the
router firmware was developed).  There is an IPv6 DNS server configured on
the router which is transmitted in the router advertisements.

A host on the network supports RFC5006.

When the host attempts lookups for local resources using the global IPv6
DNS server address it recurses to the Internet and never gets the answer
it expects for the local network resources.  The client resolver also
never attempts to contact the local, private IPv4 DNS server since the
IPv6 DNS is technically responding.  Explicit DNS queries to the local,
private DNS servers work but this not really usable.

Ultimately I had to disable DNS over IPv6 to ensure local and Internet
resources are resolvable.

In this case the local IPv4 DNS server is a separate server, frankly I am
not sure if having them be the same device ie the home router would make a
difference.  I suppose this would depend on the router's DNS capabilities.

It seems to me that this situation is bound to crop more up as IPv6
deployments increase.

John
=========================================
John Jason Brzozowski
Comcast Cable
e) mailto:john_brzozowski <at> cable.comcast.com
o) 609-377-6594
m) 484-962-0060
w) http://www.comcast6.net
=========================================


_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Fred Baker | 9 Sep 20:54 2011
Picon

Re: DNS and IPV6 within the home


On Sep 9, 2011, at 11:07 AM, Teemu Savolainen wrote:

Are the local names having some specific suffix in use, such as ".local" (or just names without dots, like "example")? I was thinking if draft-ietf-mif-dns-server-
select would be of any use, i.e. in this case the DNS server learn with DHCPv4 could be configured to have knowledge of ".local" private namespace...

I believe that ".local" is in common use. Simply using names - are you aware of the proposal in ICANN for simply using names in the root zone? http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm

Teemu

2011/9/9 Brzozowski, John <John_Brzozowski <at> cable.comcast.com>
Wanted to share something here to get some feedback and to determine if
this is something that is in scope for HOMENET.

Consider the following:

* dual stack home network
* private IPv4
* global IPv6
* local DNS that resolves local hosts, this data is not available
authoritatively on the Internet

My home router supports RFC5006 (not sure the RFC was revised when the
router firmware was developed).  There is an IPv6 DNS server configured on
the router which is transmitted in the router advertisements.

A host on the network supports RFC5006.

When the host attempts lookups for local resources using the global IPv6
DNS server address it recurses to the Internet and never gets the answer
it expects for the local network resources.  The client resolver also
never attempts to contact the local, private IPv4 DNS server since the
IPv6 DNS is technically responding.  Explicit DNS queries to the local,
private DNS servers work but this not really usable.

Ultimately I had to disable DNS over IPv6 to ensure local and Internet
resources are resolvable.

In this case the local IPv4 DNS server is a separate server, frankly I am
not sure if having them be the same device ie the home router would make a
difference.  I suppose this would depend on the router's DNS capabilities.

It seems to me that this situation is bound to crop more up as IPv6
deployments increase.

John
=========================================
John Jason Brzozowski
Comcast Cable
e) mailto:john_brzozowski <at> cable.comcast.com
o) 609-377-6594
m) 484-962-0060
w) http://www.comcast6.net
=========================================


_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Ray Bellis | 9 Sep 21:16 2011
Picon

Re: DNS and IPV6 within the home

It has been suggested that a possible consequence of the new gTLD programme may be the deprecation of single label "local" hostnames and DNS search suffixes.

There may be no practical way to differentiate a single label hostname from a gTLD with an A (or AAAA) record at its apex.

For example, which should have priority if Canon get ".canon" but I also want a printer named that on my LAN?

I don't personally think that "DNS existence tests" will be sufficient - but ensuring that local nodes have their own private namespace (i.e. ".local") would avoid that.

Ray

Sent from my iPhone

On 9 Sep 2011, at 19:55, "Fred Baker" <fred <at> cisco.com> wrote:
I believe that ".local" is in common use. Simply using names - are you aware of the proposal in ICANN for simply using names in the root zone? http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Fred Baker | 9 Sep 21:19 2011
Picon

Re: DNS and IPV6 within the home


On Sep 9, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Ray Bellis wrote:

I don't personally think that "DNS existence tests" will be sufficient - but ensuring that local nodes have their own private namespace (i.e. ".local") would avoid that.

yes
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
Ray Bellis | 9 Sep 22:03 2011
Picon

Homenet Interim - registration now open

The registration page for the Homenet Interim on 6th and 7th October is now available at:

http://www.ietf.org/registration/homenet/ietfreg.py

Ray & Mark
Mattia Rossi | 10 Sep 01:49 2011
Picon
Picon

Re: DNS and IPV6 within the home

It should be something else than .local, as mDNS is using that (see 
Section 3 of 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns-14). Use 
of .local in unicast DNS and mDNS creates some problems (see 
http://avahi.org/wiki/AvahiAndUnicastDotLocal)

I have a similar setup like John in the Lab (using FreeBSD machines and 
BIND).
I have two separate DNS severs, one for IPv4 transport and one for IPv6 
transport. Both resolve AAAA and A addresses. Both resolve local hosts: 
The IPv4 DNS resolves all hosts in the Lab, and all names are visible 
form the Internet, while the IPv6 DNS resolves only a few hosts 
(manually entered) using the same domain as the IPv4 hosts, but they're 
not visible from the Internet.
I'm using SLAAC and RFC6106 (obsoletes RFC5006) to advertise the IPv6 
DNS and a DNS search list, which consists of the domain the hosts are 
in. The IPv4 DNS is set up manually, but I've tested it with DHCP 
assigned DNS as well, and it's just the same.
The result is that on my client I have 4 DNS servers, 1 IPv6 and 3 IPv4.

Now if I resolve a host in the Internet, it goes via IPv6 transport to 
my IPv6 DNS which then goes via an other forwarder etc. until the name 
is resolved. No problem there, most of the time.
In unlucky cases the name can't be resolved, and it falls back using the 
IPv4 DNS, until the name can be resolved, or until every DNS server has 
been tried.

If I look up a local host, it goes via IPv6 DNS and if it can't be 
resolved (about 95% of the hosts can't), it will fall back to IPv4 DNS 
and resolve the names.

But I see the problem: I'm using an authoritative BIND, not forwarding 
requests for the "local" domain upstream, John's DNS server might 
forward it.
And I think that's the real problem. I think users might really want to 
use .whatever for their local domain rather than .local or something 
predefined.

And what if a user gets a domain form their ISP, and the ability to 
register one or two hosts via some web-interface, but can't push names 
via local DNS? I'm sure that the user would still set up multiple hosts 
using the very same domain fro local networking, but in that case he'd 
have partial visibility from the Internet, the two hosts registered via 
web-interface are visible, and the rest is not. How to deal with that?

Mat

On 10/09/11 05:19, Fred Baker wrote:
>
> On Sep 9, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Ray Bellis wrote:
>
>> I don't personally think that "DNS existence tests" will be sufficient
>> - but ensuring that local nodes have their own private namespace (i.e.
>> ".local") would avoid that.
>
> yes
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet <at> ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Gmane