Re: ILNP and DNS (from 2010.10.04 NANOG50 day 1 morning notes)

[Michael Sinatra <michael () rancid berkeley edu>]

On 10/5/10 9:18 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Michael Sinatra wrote:
> > Hence the question: How should I provision authoritative DNS servers,
> > given that the prefix information is provided via DNS--including the
> > prefix information for the DNS servers themselves--leading to a
> > chicken-and-egg problem.  In addition, I would assume that I need
> > something similar to glue records (instead of A or AAAA glue, I need L64
> > or LP glue).
>
> Isn't glue the answer to your question? Your name servers get their
> prefixes from the networks they are connected to, and they do dynamic
> updates to their parent zone as well as their own zone's master. Then
> other sites can find them using the usual referral chasing.

Which then implies that parent zones must use DDNS, and must enable 
secure updates from the child (from wherever the child's DDNS updates 
are sourced).  In addition, the LP and/or L64 records must have very low 
TTLs, which is very different from the way we do glue today.

> I am assuming that the name server's name is in a zone for which it is
> authoritative. If not, it doesn't appear in glue so it doesn't need to
> update the parent zone.

Yes.  That's what I was implying.

[snip]

> So I don't think your question is relevant for most zones. It *is*
> relevant for the root. ILNP will have to come up with a new scheme for the
> root zone hints. I haven't looked at it in enough detail to see if they
> already have a plan.

My question was essentially whether this has been thought out from the 
DNS perspective.  The root hints are one issue.  Having (for example) 
.com able to accept dynamic updates from foo.com's BGP-speaking border 
router whenever foo.com's routing changes (i.e. dropping an upstream 
because a link went down), having very low ttls (<60sec) on L64 "glue" 
records which must be queried in order to reach the authoritative 
nameserver, and having the infrastructure be able to keep up with such 
queries may also be an issue.  Does ILNP have a solution/recommendation 
for this?