IETF Logo Mail Archive

[DNSOP] Re: [v6ops] Re: Re: Re: Moving DNS64 (RFC6147) to Internet Standard

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Sat, 11 April 2026 14:24 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@space.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: dnsop@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59C1BDA62EEB for <dnsop@mail2.ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Apr 2026 07:24:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1775917492; bh=Pu1OwP/TUpeQODU+ocjS+89UofFPSttz6lRYA4p9iEo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=MJ1s+SV4Q3zJjhlT5aaNBM8GGh6nuyFlo+GOFvab9zgqgPL/3NHZM1u49bD1U07os GJPPP/ghOMAzwPvGrsu9bLMRSwCzQq8yyjK/Rbz2eiTGjPwc/W+HHney3oQfCyLdfp zHVHa27AyH60hdNZKb8lKOfSzIVvw4XEjF4haZoA=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=space.net
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3dInV6o4dCTK for <dnsop@mail2.ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Apr 2026 07:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gatekeeper1-relay.space.net (gatekeeper1-relay.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:3:85::38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55D0DDA62EDD for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Apr 2026 07:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=space.net; i=@space.net; q=dns/txt; s=esa; t=1775917491; x=1807453491; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=Pu1OwP/TUpeQODU+ocjS+89UofFPSttz6lRYA4p9iEo=; b=aVWacCbqCqHCcuBziJneCQoEUUM+SlYO2UY8EBWPtk7ZvJ1XatPvK4xB XcNRItZDv5caXU+KUr+SWeV1shtHpxW28h156YEDRSuqDfA/B3Wtk/7Xc QFcHQB7OSjnA8rQNq+3gv6jcDmYSHib6xBbrJ+SHSZ2Y9LAvgEUeXSIjl SB62JP+Wyex6fFsG3rR19YxLeg8j0mVua+Dm+eRKSMQie/EaBppwKfIsy mMWiaUN2l9N0OlZcSMDlaoEo8LY7dHzHwD/qJQV5KxH8n6SJvWnRWNAXD ioPJGSNfzo7mOiBHihWN+9XSxOD5zU/a2z4scP8JBzQqcDncKwlzP6uTY g==;
X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: qWbQgUg8S2msqtxgqblHrA==
X-CSE-MsgGUID: 2Fv6z0xQSpWzXRZPbI1K5A==
X-SpaceNet-SBRS: None
Received: from mobil.space.net ([195.30.115.67]) by gatekeeper1-relay.space.net with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Apr 2026 16:24:43 +0200
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E6641823815 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Apr 2026 16:24:43 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius6.space.net (moebius6.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 822491823812; Sat, 11 Apr 2026 16:24:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by moebius6.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 7DE4521AD2; Sat, 11 Apr 2026 16:24:43 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2026 16:24:43 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-7@u-1.phicoh.com>
Message-ID: <adpZq6IA3Hoq1eq3@Space.Net>
References: <m1wAunU-0000NEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <2338256.t9SDvczpPo@localhost> <038ae9d1-34fc-4085-aa6d-76ef79287857@gmail.com> <PARP264MB6760A67BB8F2060962E8A64088592@PARP264MB6760.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <B93DB6C8-2974-4915-93DE-DFCB6B858AFA@consulintel.es> <m1wB6jW-0000VYC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <m1wB6jW-0000VYC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Message-ID-Hash: BVB4MFT4C2CA33VNWRZX23CED4BJCRAD
X-Message-ID-Hash: BVB4MFT4C2CA33VNWRZX23CED4BJCRAD
X-MailFrom: gert@space.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dnsop.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: dnsop@ietf.org, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP] Re: [v6ops] Re: Re: Re: Moving DNS64 (RFC6147) to Internet Standard
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/7fWXLLi8CQDYIYmL-YP72WekHCg>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dnsop-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dnsop-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dnsop-leave@ietf.org>

Hi,

On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 09:56:54AM +0200, Philip Homburg wrote:
> > 3) If the people deploys DNSSEC together with IPv6,
> > DNS64 is not creating any trouble. It doesnt make sense to me that
> > DNSSEC is deployed without IPv6, right?
> 
> Let me give you random popular site: slack.com.
> 
> It does have DNSSEC, it doesn't have IPv6. Can we live if the real
> world please?

"it is signed" does not imply "an off-the-shelf client will do local
DNSSEC validation and fail on DNS64 replies"...  but out of curiousity:
is there anyone defaulting to "validation on" in their stub resolvers?

[..]
> This is a very roundabout way of saying the DNS64 just doesn't work for
> hosts that do local DNSSEC validation.

This is correct, and well understood.  The question is "is this relevant"?

And if this is relevant, will it excert enough pressure on major sites
like slack.com to add an IPv6 endpoint?  It's 2026, after all... no
valid excuses anymore.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard,
                                           Karin Schuler, Sebastian Cler
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: Dr. Frank Thiäner
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

v2.43.4 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status