|
|
 |
Re: [ipv6-wg@localhost] ...DNS Root Servers...
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 09:48:41 +0200
- Organization: RIPE NCC
Joao,
Joao Damas wrote:
Andrei,
there are 2 issues here, one is how to provide transport and another how
to include records in the root zone (this is the one you are referring
to but NOT the one this thread started with).
Actually how to include records in the root zone is a third issue. I
agree that as long as one maintains a list of statically configured root
servers there is no problem with enabling ipv6 for the root servers.
There is no reason not to enable IPv6 transport. It is dependant only on
the operator of the machine.
As I said we don't have definite plans regarding this. At the moment our
main priority is the anycast implementation for K. If ipv6 can be
achieved as a by-product we will probably do it. A few root servers
already provide ipv6 access but I guess that in most cases one will fall
back to ipv4 anyway to resolve a name.
People will find ways to use the service (the ones who don't already do
so with the available servers) if the service is available, so the first
step is to enable the service.
Joao
Thanks,
Andrei
On Wednesday, Jun 25, 2003, at 09:00 Europe/Amsterdam, Andrei
Robachevsky wrote:
Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 04:46:01PM +0200, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
As for the K (being an operator of this server) we don't have
definite plans for ipv6 deployment. Also there are different views
on how ipv6 access should be provided to the root zone.
Could you explain this a bit more? I'm curious what's going on.
I was referring to the problem with priming, where one can fit only
two AAAA records in the priming response provided that not all DNS
implementations support EDNS0 at the moment. One proposal I heard of
suggests that two selected root servers provide anycast service in
ipv6. I thought it was going to be published as an internet draft but
cannot find it.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
Andrei
|
|
|
|
