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

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

DNS64 should be advanced to IS, but it can include (IESG or author) notes
that *hosts* should aim to move to PREF64/etc. as written extensively in
RFC8683.

It's very useful for networks to be able to deploy DNS64 for hosts that are
either older (or are dual-stack capable from 2003, but operating IPv6-only),
or which want to have *no* IPv4, or whose local infrastructure becomes v6-only.
(They really only need a CLAT if they have v4-literals. I've run lots of
v6-only hosts for ~15 years, long before CLAT)
They do DNS requests to a local recursive nameserver (whether Do53 or
DoX), on which DNSSEC and AAAA-synthesis occurs.

There are *many* reasons to have such older hosts, and to *not* do major upgrades.
For instance, because they support applications deployed to systems that are
not, or never replaced: embedded systems for buildings, aircraft, ...
Remember, "host" can be a VM, or a even just a container.

{Many decades ago, when a WGA at BNR, I found a "devops" guy with what was
already a super ancient HP9000 series 300 workstation on/under his desk.
Because that was the build system for one generation of DMS-10.  His
email/cocos wouldn't work anymore.  He got an NCD X-terminal that afternoon,
and this critical build system got moved to the data center room.  We
considered if we should/could do that without cutting the power to it, as it
also hadn't rebooted in ~6 months.  It was fine}

So while DNS64 should be deprecated for hosts going forward, it needs to be
available as network infrastructure (in a trade-agreement compatible RFP'able
way) for some time.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

**       My working hours and your working hours may be different.         **
** Please do not feel obligated to reply outside your normal working hours **