Re: [v4v6interim] Single namespace

On Oct 1, 2008, at 2:34 PM, james woodyatt wrote:

> On Oct 1, 2008, at 10:42, Fred Baker wrote:
>>
>> The way we usually implement this kind of thing is to have multiple  
>> name servers, one of which is accessible from outside and the other  
>> is accessible from inside.
>
> The reason I've been having a hard time following this discussion is  
> that you're using the word "domain" where I've always seen the word  
> "horizon" in order to distinguish the concept from the meaning of  
> the word "domain" in Domain Name System.

The horizon is the edge of the routing domain.

>> That gives us one name space, but different responses to that  
>> translation request depending on the source of the request. DNS64  
>> does largely the same thing, but commits the gross and indecent act  
>> of saying out loud that it does so.
>
> The "gross indecency" here is, apparently, admitting in public that  
> we cannot escape the need to amend the DNS standards to recognize,  
> for the first time, that we need more than one public horizon, i.e.  
> the V4V6COEX public horizon and the IPv6 public horizon.

perhaps. I find such things a little idiotic. It's one thing to say  
you don't want to do it; there are a lot of things I don't like to do  
and want guidance when I am forced to do them. Pretending it doesn't  
exist and going bats when someone points out the elephant in the room  
isn't very productive.

> I do not see how we can escape that problem except by deprecating  
> IPv4-only operation.

You get my vote. Talk with the network operators. Do you happen to  
know any? :-)
_______________________________________________
v4v6interim mailing list
v4v6interim@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim