ICANN registrar supporting v6 glue?

Fri Jun 29 19:43:45 UTC 2007

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.