[rssac-caucus] [Ext] Re: Preliminary result in Resolver Study Work Party

[Wes Hardaker]

Note that I believe we did create a mailing list for this WP, we've since
agreed that all WP mail should be conducted on the global caucus list and
we shouldn't use the WP specific mailing lists.

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:22 AM Mario Aleman <mario.aleman at icann.org>
wrote:

> Hi Fred,
>
> Let me know follow up with Davey Song and the procedure to add him to the
> WP mailing list.
>
> Best,
>
> ---
> Mario A. Aleman
> Support Staff for RSSAC and RZERC
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>
> Mobile: +1 612-245-7112
> www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org>
>
> On 12/19/18, 4:10 AM, "Fred Baker" <fredbakersba at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>     Mario, would you kindly add Davey to the Work Party mailer?
>
>     > On Dec 19, 2018, at 4:39 PM, Davey Song <songlinjian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>     >
>     > I'm sorry and I missed last call for Resolver Study Work Party. I'm
> wondering is there any open document or preliminary result of this work
> party? I'm personally intereted in the resolver behavior on timeout and
> re-query. Can anyone give me some hint?
>
>     The SOW is at
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rssac-sow-resolver-behaviors-07aug18-en.pdf.
> We have "met", for some definition of that term, three times. The current
> progress is that:
>
>     Paul Hoffman (ICANN) is building a testbed with the intention of
> facilitating replication, on the theory that science benefits when an
> experiment can be reproduced with the same or different results. He will be
> discussing that at our January meeting.
>
>     Geoff Huston and Joao Damas are doing work at APNIC. I'm not sure what
> their schedule is, but they have discussed similarly documenting the means
> and logic behind their experiments. The experiments they carry out use a
> basic facility used by George Michelson and others at APNIC, which is
> "advertisements" carried by Google and others. It might be most easily
> explained using an example.
>
>     https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/CC?x=1&s=1&p=1&w=30&c=BE is derived
> from APNIC data. The advertisement, in this case, contains three URLs,
> which means that a client resolves three names and opens three TCP
> sessions. One name has only an A record, so the TCP session uses IPv4. The
> second name has only a AAAA record, so the TCP session uses IPv6. The third
> name has both an A and a AAAA record, and it can be interesting to observe
> which one it chooses. The first TCP session informs the experiment that a
> client is out there. The second, if its SYN arrives, tells the experiment
> that the path from client to server is IPv6-capable end to end, and the
> data shows the blue line indicating that there is a client out there that
> can possibly use IPv6. The third indicates a choice, and if the client
> chooses the AAAA record, the experiment reports that the client *prefers*
> IPv6. Now look at the web page.
>
>     Geoff uses a similar mechanism but performs different experiments.
> Since he is running the resolver and the system the TCP sessions connect
> to, he can make a number of observations about clients and resolvers, and
> draws conclusions from them. He'll have to describe anything further (and
> that's what the Work Party is asking him or Joao to document for the call
> in January), but that gives you a flavor of what's going on.
>
>     I have attached the information about the next call.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rssac-caucus mailing list
> rssac-caucus at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rssac-caucus
>


-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-caucus/attachments/20181219/7684b3df/attachment.html>