Re: A6 record status

Mark - do you have any estimate of the current use of A6 records?  I'd like to get an idea of the scope of the impact of moving A6 records to Historic.

- Ralph

On Aug 12, 2011, at 12:56 AM, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:

> 
> In message <4E447C7E.30202@gmail.com>, Brian E Carpenter writes:
>> On 2011-08-12 11:47, Mark Andrews wrote:
>>> I think it is make work 
>> 
>> That's why I am only suggesting an IESG decision, not a draft
>> and an RFC.
>> 
>>> and won't change the amount of confusion.
>>> In addition A6 allows compresssion of the domain name in the rdata
>>> so it can't be treated as unknown (i.e. a opaque blob) by nameservers.
>> 
>> If it's historic, servers shouldn't even contain any A6 records,
>> surely?
> 
> Making something historic doesn't remove the old software or the
> old records.  Removing knowledge of A6 from recursive server will
> result in garbage A6 records being delivered to old clients that
> are A6 aware.  A6 aware clients still work as they ask for both
> AAAA and A6 records.
> 
> One needs a phase out plan if you want to remove A6 support and it
> is likely to need to be decades long given how long people run old
> nameservers for.
> 
>>> If one wants to do something about IPv6 addresses in the DNS add
>>> support for scoped addresses.  Link-local could then be useful.
>> 
>> Different topic, and I suspect much more complex.
>> 
>>   Brian
> -- 
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------