Subject: DNS transition

From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 08:53:28 +0900

------- Forwarded Message

To: [email-masked]
Subject: DNS transition
X-Template-Reply-To: [email-masked]
X-Template-Return-Receipt-To: [email-masked]
X-PGP-Fingerprint: F8 24 B4 2C 8C 98 57 FD  90 5F B4 60 79 54 16 E2
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 08:50:50 +0900
Sender: [email-masked]

	we don't need to do strictly bottom up, we don't need to do strictly
	top down.
	it is easy to make eng.sun.com NS to IPv6 ready, as sun.com has the
	total control over eng.sun.com NS record.  important thing is to make
	sure:
	- have root, TLDs, to become IPv6 ready sooner.
	- ask registries to take AAAA/A6 glue records for NS
	otherwise we cannot deploy.

	we do not plan to partition the internet.  we need to gradually
	make the world dual stack (and then cease IPv4 part, but that is
	another story).

itojun

------- End of Forwarded Message

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 07:40:33 -0600

the problem is that alain did not present a complete solution.  

one possible (and i have not thought it entirely out) is adding to the
picture a dual-stack/alg dns translator and change to clients to find the
translator as a server of last resort.

once we have that software deployed[able], then, and only then, an we
plan to have a v6 root.

randy

---

From: Bruce Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 04:28:16 +1000 (EST)

> translator as a server of last resort.

Alain did not present specifics, but did (I think) include basics (such as
a dual-stack dns resolver in the resolver path).

> once we have that software deployed[able], then, and only then, an we

The existence of a v6 root does not seriously impact[1] on v4 DNS
resolutions, and provides a boost to the v6 migration of the 'net, or at
least, use of v6 DNS.

--==--
Bruce.

[1] See RSSAC presentation for possible impacts.

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 13:29:29 -0600

> a dual-stack dns resolver in the resolver path).

for the 19th time.  no one had issues with the presentation UNTIL he got
to the diagram WITHOUT a dual-stack resolver.

> resolutions, and provides a boost to the v6 migration of the 'net, or at

you seem to have missed the point that the particular diagram with a v6-only
root actually partitioned the internet.  if you don't like new.net, then you
won't like this.  if you do like new.net (and other partitionings), i
suspect you are in the wrong meeting.

randy

---

From: Bruce Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 05:58:57 +1000 (EST)

randy> > Alain did not present specifics, but did (I think) include basics (such as
randy> > a dual-stack dns resolver in the resolver path).
randy> 
randy> for the 19th time.  no one had issues with the presentation UNTIL he got
randy> to the diagram WITHOUT a dual-stack resolver.

Could the presentation under discussion appear on the 'net somewhere, as
obviously my memory (and hence my comments) of the slide on the screen at
the time of the discussion in question is incorrect.  Without that to
point at, we're just going to go round in circles.

( ie, I remember the slide on the screen at the time of the discussion as
  showing 1 collection of roots accessible via v4 and v6 + a dual-stack
  resolver being involved )

--==--
Bruce.

---

From: Ashley Kitto <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 12:52:13 -0800

>suspect you are in the wrong meeting.

Doesn't any machine with an IPv6-only stack partition the internet in more
fundamental ways?

Ashley Kitto

---

From: Bruce Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 05:26:21 +1000 (EST)

> >root actually partitioned the internet.  if you don't like new.net, then you

Yes, it will partition the 'net.  When (seriously) will a v6-only
root-server suite happen (by turning off the remaining v4 roots) ?  Not
for a long time, probably a few years after the release of RFC7654 - 'IPv4
and Why are we still bothering with it?' [1].

( Randy, I get the point.  I also understand that a v6-only root won't
  happen for decades, and may not happen if people (then) really-really
  want to keep IPv4 around. )

> Doesn't any machine with an IPv6-only stack partition the internet in more

In that it can only reach other v6-stack'd machines?  Yes.  To avoid a
partitioning of the 'net, some sort of v4<->v6 translator(s) will be
needed for a very long time, until the last v4-specific stack goes away,
or gets otherwise shot.

By the same token, if you enable nameservers on v6 *without* having the
same data available via v4, you have effectively partitioned your part of
the DNS tree.  This includes doing such stupid things as having divergent
zone data depending on whether your v4 nameserver(s) is hit, or your v6
nameserver(s) is hit.

--==--
Bruce.

[1] I will be very surprised if I get that right.

---

From: Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 12:43:55 -0800

>point at, we're just going to go round in circles.

Here are the new slides in ppt.

         - Alain.

---

From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 06:26:09 -0500

could you please send your presentation in ascii?