ICANN registrar supporting v6 glue?
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Sat Jun 30 00:38:16 UTC 2007
Because we have designed IPv6 with the view of a smooth transition AND
co-existence, and that means dual-stack, at least in the end-sites.
Otherwise is not *smooth* anymore, and you will find troubles, it is just a
matter of time they will get resolved, of course.
> De: Pete Templin <petelists at templin.org>
> Responder a: <petelists at templin.org>
> Fecha: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:14:30 -0500
> Para: <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
> CC: <nanog at nanog.org>
> Asunto: Re: ICANN registrar supporting v6 glue?
> JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>> My view is that deploying only IPv6 in the LANs is the wrong approach in the
>> short term, unless you're sure that all your applications are ready, or you
>> have translation tools (that often are ugly), and you're disconnected from
>> the rest of the IPv4 Internet.
> You're entitled to your view.
>>> De: Barrett Lyon <blyon at blyon.com>
>>> Responder a: <blyon at blyon.com>
>>> CC: <nanog at merit.edu>
>>>> If you deploy dual-stack, it is much easier to keep doing the DNS
>>>> using IPv4 transport, and there is not any practical advantage in
>>>> doing so
>>>> with IPv6 transport.
>>> Thanks Jordi, not to sound too brash but, I'm already doing so. I am
>>> trying not to deploy a hacked v6 service which requires an incumbent
>>> legacy protocol to work.
> As said by others, the core infrastructure really should be ready for
> v6-only. Why should it be so hard?
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