<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Raymond Chandler wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:773E8CAB-F146-452D-A3FD-AE202157A2B2@freeswitch.org"
type="cite"><br>
<div>
<div>On Aug 20, 2009, at 5:25 PM, Carlos S. Antunes wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Raymond Chandler wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:4D73B669-478E-44EF-83D7-0AA745286ACB@freeswitch.org"
type="cite">
<div>
<div>On Aug 20, 2009, at 5:03 PM, Carlos S. Antunes wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Hmm, where does it say that, after the lookup, one cannot
use the same <br>
IP address as before? :)<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<div>Section 4 of RFC3263 as quoted in my first email....</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"<span class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-family: Monaco,'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 9px; line-height: 26px; white-space: pre;">The
procedures here MUST be done exactly once per transaction, where
transaction is as defined in [1]. </span></div>
<div>"</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Raymond, sure. But do the "procedures here" preclude one from choosing
the same host given that both the priorities and weights are the same
for all the hosts?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>well, not exactly, in fact... every so often, you will end up
choosing the same 1 out of 4 hosts twice in a row at random</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Exactly! :)<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:773E8CAB-F146-452D-A3FD-AE202157A2B2@freeswitch.org"
type="cite">
<div>but the procedures basically say to choose one at random</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Right, but isn't the generator pseudo-random, instead? (If one takes
"random" literally, pseudo-random would violate the spec!) What
prevents one from using the "right" pseudo-random generator? <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:773E8CAB-F146-452D-A3FD-AE202157A2B2@freeswitch.org"
type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That said, I'm really just about done with this thread since I
don't personally agree with the spec in this case anyway since stale
nonce checking makes sense to avoid replay attacks, etc. Although, I
haven't looked at the specs to see if checking for stale nonces breaks
any specs... that might be an interesting search ;-)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I am going to try to find an appropriate IETF mailing list to ask some
questions about this random SRV stuff and will repost here once I have
some additional info.<br>
<br>
Thanks for trying to keep me honest, though! :)<br>
<br>
Carlos Antunes<br>
Nowthor Corporation<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>