[dns-wg] Re: Re: IPv6 glue AAAA RRs in the root zone

On 21 Jul, 2004, at 11:50, Brad Knowles wrote:

> At 10:11 AM +0100 2004-07-21, Jim Reid wrote:
>
>>  Personally, I don't see why you care about the RTT to a root server. 
>> A
>>  well-behaved name server will make 4-5 queries to a root server once 
>> a
>>  week or so. Why optimise that? Please note I'm not suggesting that
>>  it's OK for root servers to have lousy RTTs. My name server is in
>>  regular, frequent contact with other name servers that have RTTs
>>  longer than 200ms.
>
> 	Well, I'm not an IPv6 expert by any stretch of the imagination, but 
> the impression I got was that if you were IPv6-only, and all the root 
> nameservers you can reach via IPv6 are routed via highly undesirable 
> paths, then you would be in a pretty bad situation.  It's fine for 
> some of those IPv6 addresses to be non-production or very 
> sub-optimally routed, but I think the problem comes from when that 
> happens to all of them.
>
> 	At least, that was my take.
>
>>  Well, what other choice is there? :-) And anyway, since the 
>> overwhelming
>>  bulk of the world's name servers are IPv4-only, resolution over IPv6
>>  doesn't seem to be a particularly productive exercise.
>
> 	True enough.

True enough for what subset of users?
If the a user is interested in only a few and those provide the service 
that user needs and uses, what does he/she care about a million servers 
out there? The problem here is that this initial missing link does not 
enable a user that could be IPv6 only and live without a NAT, to do so.
It is this lack of enabling that is the problem from my point of view.

Joao