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

[[e-mail]]

Hi Philip, all,

Without interfering with the technical discussion as I'm setting myself in listen mode for this discussion, I'd like to highlight the following:

* Handling of literals and (address referrals, in general) was not part of the objectives set for DNS64. This was analyzed and discussed in several RFCs, e.g., RFC 6889.

* We need to separate the deployment model vs the functional entity (normative part of the spec): the use of DNSSEC/DNS64 is discussed in many documents as well. Discovery of PREF64 was also motivated by allowing local DNSSEC validation (e.g., Section 2 of rfc8781).

* When DNS64 was designed, there were (CLAT precursors of) local synthesis proposals at the time (rfc2767 --"Bump-In-the-Stack" Technique (BIS), rfc3338 --"Bump-in-the-API" (BIA), rfc6535 -- "Bump-in-the-Host" (BIH))). The side effect of all these mechanisms is that they hide the issue of these applications and offer no exist strategy for such modules.

* There ongoing efforts that require DNS64 service for their innovation (see the ongoing work in SNAC WG, for example).

* The operational reality is that DNS64 is deployed in many networks out there, there are public DNS64 resolvers, etc. which is a clear indication that, although there are tradeoffs, and that these operators made an informed decision to invest money and run the service for their customers. These tradeoffs belongs to those who deploy.

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> De la part de Philip Homburg
> Envoyé : vendredi 10 avril 2026 09:32
> À : [e-mail]
> Cc : Dan Wing <[e-mail]>; IPv6 Operations
> <[e-mail]>
> Objet : [DNSOP] Re: [v6ops] Moving DNS64 (RFC6147) to Internet
> Standard
> 
> 
> > 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?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.