IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-7@u-1.phicoh.com> Fri, 10 April 2026 07:32 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-b55F8B228@u-1.phicoh.com>
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 80298D94B5B3; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1775806345; bh=b+ciX+kI9pxjuOXDE4q6A0Y1phCrCzLrZmE23BXcXGc=; h=To:Cc:Subject:From:References:In-reply-to:Date; b=TZMTVaGY1Sl1asXnwWyhAD+XTnBUHxUwjT+DUtJ7x0bNHpbwD5/HNlRlOlHoPmL32 ByhkvPqctyOPiNMAqVui3B1GNIObnNVSRMXWJpXpvWbFik153moUkU4KrEKBcBYTa4 a2j9wBZhxalvdBJX3MWnsy7CG3MaSueu+6wyYNd4=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 xfqFP4LRmqH3; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo.hq.phicoh.net [IPv6:2a10:3781:2413:1:2a0:c9ff:fe9f:17a9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9C08D94B5AB; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (TLS version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305) (Smail #158) id m1wB6Lm-0000OLC; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:32:22 +0200
Message-Id: <m1wB6Lm-0000OLC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
From: Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-7@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-b55F8B228@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <m1wAunU-0000NEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <C0B30CAA-FDB8-4553-990E-7FA2A43E10CF@gmail.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 9 Apr 2026 12:56:59 -0700 ." <C0B30CAA-FDB8-4553-990E-7FA2A43E10CF@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:32:22 +0200
Message-ID-Hash: B3VT3TV5ALY7D6R5P6P5DHDBUYMDQM6X
X-Message-ID-Hash: B3VT3TV5ALY7D6R5P6P5DHDBUYMDQM6X
X-MailFrom: pch-b55F8B228@u-1.phicoh.com
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: Dan Wing <danwing@gmail.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP] Re: [v6ops] 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/7jTE4LzbadjSurEChiEAkh2ak_w>
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>

> The functionality of DNS64 is still needed with NAT64 -- it just
> need not be in a network device but can/should be in the client.

Just curious, are there hosts that literally have a DNS64 component for
communication with the IPv4 internet?

One of the (many) problems with DNS64 in combination with NAT64 is that
it doesn't provide a solution for IPv4 literals.

This can be solved by either running a CLAT on the host or a library
that can synthesize the right IPv6 address based on an IPv4 address.
If a library already has that capability, then why introduce DNS64 as well?

v2.45.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status