Re: RFC 5006 status

[Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:41:45PM +0100, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:56:05 +0100, Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Philip Homburg
> > <pch-v6ops@u-1.phicoh.com> wrote:
> >> From an implementors point of view, the main thing I find annoying about
> >> RFC-5006 is that information about DNS servers ends up in the kernel
> >> instead of in user land where I need it. And I don't want the kernel to
> >> store and forward all kinds of user land data. Of course, it is always
> >> possible to send an extra router solicitation ICMP from user land...
> 
> There is no need to store it. It just needs to be forwarded. (Arguably
> though, the whole auto-configuration should be entirely done in user space
> anyway.)

It would probably be a good idea, much more flexible than configuring via
sysctl.

> 
> > As for as I know, rdnssd and radns both process the RA information in
> > userspace. There's no handling of DNS in the kernel.
> 
> As one of the co-author of rdnssd, I can assure you that this is incorrect.
> rdnssd gets the RDNSS information from the Linux kernel via NetLink out of
> the kernel SLAAC code.

I should have been clearer. There's indeed a forwarding, but no
processing of the DNS information happens in the kernel.

regards,

Benoit
-- 
:wq