Re: [DNSOP] AD sponsoring draft-cheshire-sudn-ipv4only-dot-arpa

Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-3@u-1.phicoh.com> Fri, 06 July 2018 08:33 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-bCE2691D2@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC365130E8D for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 01:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6l1bkvmIDHNh for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 01:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo6-tun.hq.phicoh.net [IPv6:2001:888:1044:10:2a0:c9ff:fe9f:17a9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7018D130E6B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 01:33:25 -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-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) (Smail #157) id m1fbMB8-0000FkC; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 10:33:22 +0200
Message-Id: <m1fbMB8-0000FkC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
From: Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-3@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-bCE2691D2@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <m1fb194-0000FpC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <A61E2913-891E-4F14-82AF-A8A40F39F47F@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 6 Jul 2018 08:37:51 +1000 ." <A61E2913-891E-4F14-82AF-A8A40F39F47F@isc.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 10:33:18 +0200
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/nSsK5x2vTfpwDmpbiwcc5HAgYP0>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] AD sponsoring draft-cheshire-sudn-ipv4only-dot-arpa
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 08:33:28 -0000

> Most of the special
> handling could be avoided if IANA was instructed to run the servers
> for ipv4only.arpa on dedicated addresses. Hosts routes could then
> be installed for those address that redirect traffic for ipv4only.arpa
> to the ISPs DNS64/ipv4only.arpa server.
> 
> Perhaps 2 address blocks could be allocated for this purpose. One
> for ipv4 and one for ipv6.

If I understand the implications correctly, that would introduce a
completely new way of discovering the NAT64 prefix. We allready have 3,
do we need a 4th one?