Re: FW: AAAA/A6

Paul A Vixie <vixie@mfnx.net> Thu, 22 March 2001 14:32 UTC

Received: from psg.com (exim@psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id JAA12029 for <dnsext-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 09:32:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lserv by psg.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14g5oB-000NJf-00 for namedroppers-data@psg.com; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 06:11:23 -0800
Received: from pcp000682pcs.wireless.meeting.ietf.org ([135.222.64.182] helo=roam.psg.com ident=root) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14g5oA-000NJX-00 for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 06:11:22 -0800
Received: from randy by roam.psg.com with local (Exim 3.20 #1) id 14g5o6-0004ZT-00 for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 08:11:18 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200103221358.FAA22464@redpaul.mfnx.net>
To: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: FW: AAAA/A6
In-Reply-To: Message from itojun@iijlab.net of "Thu, 22 Mar 2001 08:44:56 +0900." <16934.985218296@coconut.itojun.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 05:58:39 -0800
From: Paul A Vixie <vixie@mfnx.net>
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

A6 wasn't originated by the DNS community, it was a response to the IPv6
community's desire to push their rapid/continuous renumbering requirement
into DNS rather than having to invent new support protocols in IPv6 itself.

Therefore if the IPv6 community withdraws its rapid/continuous renumbering
requirement then the DNS community will absolutely withdraw its A6 proposal.
I do not consider this likely, and moreover, while I'm not a direct
participant in the IPv6 community, I think that rapid/continuous renumbering
is the only thing that makes IPv6 worth deploying.

> 	- name server with good backend database
> 		(in this case AAAA and A6 management costs are requal)

For any given network this may or may not be the case.  Sounds like for the
IIJLab network it is the case.  But I know of hundreds of networks for whom
it is NOT the case (starting with most of PAIX's customers.)  Good backend
databases, or even...

> 	- good perl script with AAAA (easy enough, deployable now)

...good perl scripts, are not universally applicable or scalable, and will
not lead to transit-provider fluidity.  Some of the stickiness of a network
to its transit provider has to do with the cost of renumbering.  And at the
moment, multihoming is hellishly expensive since it requires portable address
space which most networks don't have the resources to qualify for.

> 	i believe our network is already large enough, and i'm happy with AAAA.

in contrast, i believe that IPv6 is not worth its deployment cost, not even
in a testbed, unless we deploy (or test) the rapid/continuous renumbering
features.  if you don't believe me, find a member of the GPRS community and
ask *them*.  or anyone in the mobile data community.  or anyone whose network
touches PAIX or Equinix or similar for the majority purpose of selecting their
transit providers based on price and quality and without regard to renumbering
cost.


to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.