ICANN registrar supporting v6 glue?

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Fri Jun 29 23:11:04 UTC 2007

What I recall from the ICANN Lisbon meeting (end of March), after the SSAC
and RSSAC recommendations, is that a plan is being worked out with the root
operators in order to make sure that they have the deployment done and then
the hints file is modified.

I believe this will not take too much time (just a few months ?), if folks
are interested I can probably investigate about the concrete timing.

Today the ICANN board also approved a new resolution about IPv6, which I
just posted here:


> De: Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis at neustar.biz>
> Responder a: <owner-nanog at merit.edu>
> Fecha: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:43:45 -0400
> Para: <nanog at merit.edu>
> CC: <ed.lewis at neustar.biz>
> Asunto: Re: ICANN registrar supporting v6 glue?
> At 9:23 -0700 6/29/07, Barrett Lyon wrote:
>> I would like to support v6 so a native v6 only user can still communicate
>> with my network, dns and all, apparently in practice that is not easy to
>> do, which is somewhat ironic given all of the v6 push lately.  It also
>> seems like the roots are not even fully supporting this properly?
> Given that the ARIN BoT has published a call to move to IPv6:
>   http://www.arin.net/media/releases/070521-v6-resolution.pdf
> and that LACNIC and .MX have made these statements:
>   http://lacnic.net/en/anuncios/2007_agotamiento_ipv4.html
>   http://www.nic.mx/es/Noticias_2?NEWS=220
> and ICANN has been studying the issue:
>   http://www.icann.org/committees/security/sac018.pdf
> What possibly can be done to get the root zone "really" available on
> IPv6? http://www.root-servers.org/ lists a few root servers as having
> IPv6 addresses, so "really" means having
> for i in a b c d e f g h i j k l m; do dig $i.root-servers.net aaaa
> +norec; done
> return at least one AAAA in the answer section.
> What's the hold up?  What's getting worked on?  Is there a
> dns-root-on-ipv6-deployment task force anywhere?  Is there someone
> that can give an authoritative update on where we are on the road to
> being able to accomplish what is requested above?  Part of my
> reaction is to the quip "given all of the v6 push lately" juxtaposed
> with NANOG 40 that barely mentioned IPv6 in the agenda.
> If we can't get one application (DNS) to do IPv6 how can we expect
> the ISPs to just up and deploy it?  I would suspect that getting the
> roots - or just some of them - to legitimize their IPv6 presence
> would be easier than getting ISPs rolling.
> -- 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
> NeuStar
> Think glocally.  Act confused.

The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

More information about the NANOG mailing list