IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: (ngtrans) Last call on draft-ietf-ngtrans-dns-ops-req-02.txt

itojun@iijlab.net Sat, 20 October 2001 07:47 UTC

Received: from patan.sun.com (patan.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA10377 for <ngtrans-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 03:47:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from engmail3.Eng.Sun.COM ([129.144.170.5]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA29573; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 01:46:23 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM [129.146.168.88]) by engmail3.Eng.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id AAA09546; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 00:45:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.1+Sun/8.12.1) with ESMTP id f9K7iSOI001441 for <ngtrans-dist@sunroof.eng.sun.com>; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 00:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.1+Sun/8.12.1/Submit) id f9K7iSQs001440 for ngtrans-dist; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 00:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: sunroof.eng.sun.com: majordomo set sender to owner-ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com using -f
Received: from engmail4.Eng.Sun.COM (engmail4 [129.144.134.6]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.1+Sun/8.12.1) with ESMTP id f9K7iOOI001433 for <ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com>; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 00:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lukla.Sun.COM (lukla.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.5.31]) by engmail4.Eng.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL, v2.1p1) with ESMTP id AAA02923 for <ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com>; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 00:44:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from coconut.itojun.org (coconut.itojun.org [210.160.95.97]) by lukla.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA27233 for <ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com>; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 02:16:01 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from itojun.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by coconut.itojun.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C9E4B22; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 16:44:20 +0900 (JST)
To: Alain Durand <alain.durand@eng.sun.com>
Cc: ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com
In-reply-to: alain.durand's message of Fri, 19 Oct 2001 11:36:17 MST. <3BD072A1.A90DBC05@eng.sun.com>
X-Template-Reply-To: itojun@itojun.org
X-Template-Return-Receipt-To: itojun@itojun.org
X-PGP-Fingerprint: F8 24 B4 2C 8C 98 57 FD 90 5F B4 60 79 54 16 E2
Subject: Re: (ngtrans) Last call on draft-ietf-ngtrans-dns-ops-req-02.txt
From: itojun@iijlab.net
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 16:44:20 +0900
Message-ID: <21187.1003563860@itojun.org>
Sender: owner-ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: itojun@iijlab.net

>>         I believe I fully understand the problem.  it is still possible to
>>         workaround the issue in 2.2 operationally by configuring nameservers
>>         in IPv6-only network like my previous email.  I don't think "bridging
>>         system" is absolutely necessary.
>
>If we do what you suggest, it will mean, from the example in 2.2,
>that no IPv6 only host could browse pages from www.foobar.org until
>- There is an IPv6 capable root name server
>- There is an IPv6 capable name server for .org.
>- There is an IPv6 capable name server for foobar.org.
>....
>and so on if we were looking for www.x.y.z.foobar.org
>
>Basically, you are telling us we can not use IPv6 to do DNS resolution
>until every single zone that may contain any sub-zone that contains
>AAAA records are also served by an IPv6 capable name server.
>I do not thik this is acceptable.

	good reason to be dual-stacked.  being IPv6 only is not that easy today.

itojun

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email