IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Thu, 09 April 2026 19:17 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
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 4A270D8F02C5; Thu, 9 Apr 2026 12:17:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1775762238; bh=FzmEfwo07DS59MHQcgun6VoQLSY/PBvqXLgYp1XRVTc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=ZsGiHTQFFVmG+HoWAYtzbK413kSGrFNJaeZiQkMT9V9gVGzBN0FJNmbP2FhSSxnke 75vu2sN7eK6ZD8bfWsuYtF6zrPRufgW4Qlk2FHmbop6AQ1Bh1df4CwzqEcEBpVrOHN WcI7HPNvy6v4JuH1zYkqW7suRQCC0HL/KQiNFxXg=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redbarn.org
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 l4iJpCJLmpAQ; Thu, 9 Apr 2026 12:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from util.redbarn.org (util.redbarn.org [24.104.150.222]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB3BCD8F02B9; Thu, 9 Apr 2026 12:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "*.redbarn.org", Issuer "Sectigo Public Server Authentication CA DV R36" (not verified)) by util.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 485EC160B36; Thu, 09 Apr 2026 19:17:10 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=redbarn.org; s=util; t=1775762230; bh=FzmEfwo07DS59MHQcgun6VoQLSY/PBvqXLgYp1XRVTc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=TE0vezuWifTIoFKyVNI7hdu/sZU64xnMQQd/8PnXRCMBGWpGtizykOAbirAC4DtXf ph64UhsiB3J4F4eArZoiApCZ+yxWwacbkOQJ/ZtTE2syXj12gRFHGU9v2k0oc7vqUr VrolS9NKClQh/VnqXNUHsnVAdH7gqCsVA/GYac4k=
Received: from localhost.localnet (2606-4e80-1201-0016-b906-21eb-116e-3550.722262346536e7a17254ef7541820776.ip6.frontiernet.net [IPv6:2606:4e80:1201:16:b906:21eb:116e:3550]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD9F219; Thu, 09 Apr 2026 19:17:12 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2026 12:17:09 -0700
Message-ID: <2338256.t9SDvczpPo@localhost>
Organization: FW
In-Reply-To: <m1wAunU-0000NEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
References: <m1wAunU-0000NEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="nextPart7255869.jJDZkT8p0M"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID-Hash: YYA4YH25CPXVA43PXTJVR5KTFL5H7T2J
X-Message-ID-Hash: YYA4YH25CPXVA43PXTJVR5KTFL5H7T2J
X-MailFrom: paul@redbarn.org
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: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-7@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP] 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/nd-hAXnEac8bLokNd1yJWbTxPQQ>
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>

On Thursday, April 9, 2026 12:12:12 PM PDT Philip Homburg wrote:
> > ...
> 
> In my opinion we should strongly discourage deploying DNS64. So moving
> DNS64 to Internet Standard sends completely the wrong message.

so, i agree, but:

> DNS64 is incompatible with local DNSSEC validation. This combines the
> worst of both worlds: something doesn't work both because of DNSSEC and
> IPv6.
> 
> New deployments of NAT64 should either use some kind of address synthesis
> in a library or deploy a CLAT.

we should not need new deployments of v6/v4 transition technology almost 20 years 
after june 6 2006, and it's time for the IETF to occupy that position.

-- 
Paul Vixie

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status