Re: [v6ops] New draft at dnsop a bis for DNS IPv6 Transport Operational Guidelines

Thanks for writing this, I found it to be well written and clear. I agree
and support this, "promoting" IPv6 to the same level as legacy IP is
probably a bit overdue in some guidance documents, and this is an important
one to address.
One off-the-cuff thought, take it or leave it:
It is briefly mentioned it in the draft, but I would emphasize the
transition technologies and the part they play in masking problems. This is
becoming more and more exposed as we start stripping away IPv4 and exposing
where those tools are hiding gaps in plain sight. This is not likely to
change, especially as we get further down the transition path, but the more
of those gaps we can fill with simple things like dual stacking a resolver
the less technical debt we have to dig out of later. And, as we all
probably know, when DNS is broken or slow, it looks like the network is
broken or slow, which often leads to things like "IPv6 is breaking the
network, turn it off" and we definitely do not want that.

Thanks,

nb

On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 7:28 AM Momoka Yamamoto <momoka.my6@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've submitted a draft to the dnsop wg
> DNS IPv6 Transport Operational Guidelines
> draft-momoka-dnsop-3901bis
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-momoka-dnsop-3901bis/
>
> It has been 20 years since this RFC was published and I think it is time
> for an update to have IPv6 to a SHOULD for DNS servers.
>
> I will be presenting this draft tomorrow morning at dnsop wg so I would be
> very grateful if you could give me feedback on this draft.
>
> Best,
>
> Momoka
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>