Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS to Proposed Standard
Johan Ihren <johani@autonomica.se> Wed, 27 March 2002 18:26 UTC
Received: from psg.com (exim@psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA14164 for <dnsext-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 13:26:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lserv by psg.com with local (Exim 3.35 #1) id 16qHrK-000DXW-00 for namedroppers-data@psg.com; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 10:09:18 -0800
Received: from snout.autonomica.se ([192.71.80.82]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 16qHrJ-000DXQ-00 for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 10:09:17 -0800
Received: by snout.autonomica.se (Postfix, from userid 1211) id C7E8CF92; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 19:08:11 +0100 (CET)
To: Nathan Jones <nathanj@optimo.com.au>
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS to Proposed Standard
References: <200203141526.KAA19163@ietf.org> <20020327212727.B23106@connect.com.au>
From: Johan Ihren <johani@autonomica.se>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 19:08:11 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20020327212727.B23106@connect.com.au>
Message-ID: <2cu1r1lw8k.fsf@snout.autonomica.net>
Lines: 46
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Nathan Jones <nathanj@optimo.com.au> writes: > Having been away from the list for a while, the arguments against this > draft have already been discussed. I'm sending this message to note > that I also object to draft-ietf-dnsext-ipv6-addresses-01.txt. As do I (i.e. I've been away from the list and *do* object). But I think that by now the reasons that some of us want to keep A6 have been iterated by kre and Paul that there is really no need for me to take the arguments through the hoops again. In this mess we have at one end basically two DNS camps shouting at each other while at another end we have (at least I think we have) the v6 community silently watching (in horror?). And the sad thing is that the v6 community (with a few notable exceptions) doesn't seem to care about this debate, and this by itself is used as an argument to kill A6/DNAME. And the question that will never get answered is whether all of the v6 community that helped vote against A6/DNAME realize how little impact keeping A6/DNAME would have on their deployment plans, written software, etc, etc. In hindsight I think that the A6/DNAME camp made a long series of tactical mistakes: The first was the bitstrings. That one wasn't a real winner. I can remember few things that have confused me as much as working with bitstrings. The second was (possibly) DNAME, since that particular rope seems to be regarded as more dangerous than all the other ropes available out there. The third was pushing for AAAA synthesis as a *transition* mechanism when it should have been described as an A6 core vs AAAA edge strategy (thereby alleviating worries among all the people who've already used AAAA in all kinds of software). And at the end A6 was lost, the most crucial piece, and one that cannot be replaced. Ever. Johan Ihrén Autonomica -- to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… Nathan Jones
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… Paul Vixie
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… Johan Ihren
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… Nathan Jones
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… Danny Mayer
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… Tim Chown
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
- Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS… Robert Elz