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

[Thomas Narten <[e-mail]>]

FYI

------- Forwarded Message

From: Paul Vixie <[e-mail]>
To: The IESG <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:24:13 -0800
Subject: Re: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS to Proposed Standard

Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-ipv6-addresses-01.txt

i object.  i consider this document, and the process which has led to it,
to be anticompetitive in the extreme.  it will also relegate IPv6 to mobile
data applications and will cement NAT as the main way for enterprises of all
sizes to connect to "the internet."  the process which led up to it involved
secret meetings and the decisions were never ratified by any working group.

consider that IPv6 allows far larger enterprise networks to use globally
_unique_ address space than IPv4.  now consider that no such enterprise will
have globally _routable_ address space except for a few large ISP's.  this
disconnect between eligibility for globally _unique_ vs globally _routable_
address space must inevitably lead to higher customer stiction by these few
large ISP's.  the "renumbering penality" for an enterprise with its own
globally unique (but not globally routable) /64 is much higher than for an
enterprise with its own globally unique /27 and its own internal RFC1918
cloud.

this document leads to a scenario where multihoming can only be practical
for a small number of "externally visible" hosts, but never for the whole
enterprise.  the artificially high "renumbering penalty" of a pure-AAAA
solution will either drive enterprises to continue using NAT and RFC1918,
or will drive them to remain customers of the ISP who owns their address
space regardless of market pressures to move elsewhere.

crawford's A6/DNAME proposal has some warts but it has none of THESE warts.

i am researching the appropriate federal agency to lodge a complaint about
anticompetitive activity, since the IETF's membership (including some of
the authors of this draft) are employees or agents of the large ISP's who
will benefit from a market stranglehold if this standard is approved.

meanwhile, i urge that this document be shredded and its authors chastised.

re:

> To: IETF-Announce: ;
> Cc: [e-mail]
> From: The IESG <[e-mail]>
> SUBJECT: Last Call: Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS to Proposed
>          Standard
> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:26:24 -0500
> 
> The IESG has received a request from the DNS Extensions Working Group
> to consider Representing IPv6 addresses in DNS
> <draft-ietf-dnsext-ipv6-addresses-01.txt> as a Proposed Standard.
> 
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action.  Please send any comments to the
> [e-mail] or [e-mail] mailing lists by April 2, 2002.
> 
> Files can be obtained via
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dnsext-ipv6-addresses-01.txt


------- End of Forwarded Message

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