Subject: Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS to Proposed Standard

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉<[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 02:14:56 +0900

>>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2002 18:13:34 -0500, 
>>>>> Danny Mayer <[email-masked]> said:

> I'm confused by this.  What has the transport to do with the query? If you use
> IPv4 or IPv6 or smoke signals to query the nameserver why does the query
> have to request a specific record type?

I have the same confusion.  Even with the fact many DNS servers and
resolvers do not support IPv6 transport for DNS, they are still
resolving AAAA (and, sometimes, A6).  This is in fact how Windows XP
and Solaris (as a resolver) and BIND 8 is working in the real world,
and, as I said in my previous message, we are now deploying IPv6 in
commercial services with these implementations (in some cases, they
sometimes use private IPv4 network for name resolution, and it simply
works well.)  So I don't think the period to deploy DNS IPv6 transport
can be a moratorium to deploy A6.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					[email-masked]

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Danny Mayer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 18:13:34 -0500

At 11:56 PM 3/30/02, Robert Elz wrote:
>     Date:        Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:44:18 -0500
>     From:        Rob Austein <[email-masked]>
>     Message-ID:  <[email-masked]>
>
>
>   | The options that I can see are:
>
>The option I think I'd like to see at the minute is that we require
>that resolvers capable of receiving replies with RA clear, and acting upon
>them, send queries for A6 when using IPv6 transport (and regardless of
>what link layer is under that, including IPv4 tunnels)
>
>I can live with continuing to use AAAA over IPv4, as that should eventually
>fade away (sometime in the future).   If it doesn't, then what we do with
>IPv6 DNS is going to largely be irrelevant.
>
>For the users, that means that A6 records should be added to zone files if
>your server can be reached over IPv6 (if it can only be reached over IPv4
>then it doesn't really matter whether A6 records are there or not).   While
>IPv4 connectivity is offered, then AAAA records should be available as well.
>If the server isn't signing records then it is free to construct A6 0 out of
>AAAA or AAAA out of A6 records (synthesis) as required - if records are being
>signed then both will need to be in the zone file before signing, whether by
>human action or server creation doesn't matter.
>
>This way the people who want to move forward as fast as possible can keep on
>using AAAA, as while there remain no IPv6 root servers, essentially all name
>resolution has to be done via IPv4 (and who can tell how long it is going
>to take before that political football obtains a solution).
>
>But once we start using native IPv6 for full name resolution (other than from
>back end to smarter resolver, which quite likely will always be AAAA and
>synthesis, though individual implementations would be free to use A6 any
>time they choose over IPv6 transport) A6 will start being used.
>
>The time from now until when IPv6 name resolution really starts to be deployed
>can be used for other implementations to support A6 records properly - as
>long as the implementors become aware that this is what the solution is to be,
>there should be plenty of time for users to be able to again have a choice
>as to which implementation to deploy.

         Danny

---

From: Robert Elz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 18:51:48 +0700

Date:        Tue, 02 Apr 2002 18:13:34 -0500
    From:        Danny Mayer <[email-masked]>
    Message-ID:  <[email-masked]>

  | I'm confused by this.  What has the transport to do with the query?

Nothing at all really.   I'd much prefer that we just use A6 records
now, regardless of how they're transported.

But people seem to not want to wait until servers that support A6 properly
are deployed.

If we do nothing, and just keep on using AAAA, then A6 has no chance, there's
no way to add it later - except just possibly that one - servers need to
be upgraded to use IPv6 transport (which is currently useless for name
resolution in general, as you there are no IPv6 reachable root servers, and
no IPv6 addresses, whatever the RR format, in referrals anywhere that
really matters).

So, that provides us with perhaps one compromise that will allow people
to start deploying more IPv6 in the DNS now, while not completely
shutting the door on A6.

kre