ipv6 only DNS?

Stephen Sprunk stephen at sprunk.org
Sun Jun 21 16:39:39 UTC 2009

Joe Abley wrote:
> Some time ago I checked the ORG and INFO registries and discovered
> that the number of host objects there with IPv6 address attributes was
> very small. I presumed at the time that it was either hard to find a
> registrar that would support IPv6 addresses for hosts, or that people
> were just not paying much attention to v6-only resolution.

At least for now, it's pretty well accepted that basic servers like DNS,
SMTP, IMAP, HTTP proxies, etc. MUST be dual-stacked for the duration of
the transition.  Even if your clients are IPv6-only, they can still
resolve hostnames, send mail, surf the web, etc. to sites that are
IPv4-only via those few servers.  Generic, scalable solutions would be
better rather than protocol-specific proxies of course, and the IETF is
working on that angle, but in the meantime it'll allow the most common
client-server protocols to keep working and get some experience with IPv6.

Also, keep in mind that the vast majority of folks out there still can't
get native IPv6 transit from their upstreams and may not be willing to
trust free tunnel brokers with production traffic to their servers. 
Even if they can, most eyeballs trying to hit them are still IPv4-only
and the few IPv6 eyeballs can be assumed to have proxies since otherwise
they couldn't see 99.9999% of the Internet.

This is what it looks like before critical mass is achieved.


Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3241 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20090621/0c16b8a6/attachment.bin>

More information about the NANOG mailing list