Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote:
> In message <20140304234206.gc9...@mx1.yitter.info>, Andrew Sullivan
> writes:
>> On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 04:50:33AM -0800, SM wrote: > correctly the
>> answer in the DNS cache would be for a non-global > resource. There
>> is no longer an assumption of uniqueness. As a > local decision I
>> would use low TTLs [1].
>>
>> But as Michael pointed out upthread, the more realistic and compelling
>> (if harder to understand) examples involve a dual-homed node like a
>> phone flipping from one interface to another. You'd need sub-second
>> TTLs for that not to be a problem, and we don't have those.
> I don't see current phones flip from WiFi to 3/4G multiple times a
> second. They have longer duty cycles than that. Additionally if you
> are in such a zone you tend to 1) move or 2) force WiFi or 3/4G to get
> stability.
Current Android phones have to turn one or to turn the other on. (I can't
speak for other brands). They also don't do MIF at all.
That why it takes so long, and it pissed people off, and it's gonna get fixed.
At that point, it won't be that they "flip", so much as they always have the
3G alive, but the wifi could get too weak and it might flip things over.
People don't want to be "forcing" things --- they want to just have a device
in their pocket that does stuff for them.
So I agree that this isn't a problem we see today, but maybe next year;
certainly before homenet w/DNSSEC is seen by early adopters.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting for hire =-
pgpikg7H7ou4W.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
