|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: IPv6 reverse lookup - lame delegation?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Nico Schottelius [mailto:[email protected]] wrote: > Hello! > > I am more or less new to nanog (reading it about half a year), > so please correct me, if I do something wrong. > > Jeroen Massar [Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 02:07:27PM +0100]: > > Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote: > > > if i try to log into my machines back in tokyo by IPv6 > SSH, it takes > > > very long time. i guess i found the reason - > (possible) lame delegation > > > of blah.ip6.int. ip6.arpa. query returns instantly. > > > how could we fix it? > > > > By fixing the software as ip6.int was deprecated 2 years+++ > > ago as you should already know. > > I've read the RFC and also talked to some people using IPv6 adresses, > especially some using 6to4 (2002:/16). > > As far as I know the reverse mapping for 2002 is only > available through ip6.int, or am I wrong? Not wrong but correct. Delegations for that block can be requested by emailing [email protected] But Geoff Huston has already published this draft: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-huston-6to4-reverse-dns-01.txt Which should solve the 6to4 problem. Personally I would say that 6to4 shouldn't be given reverse though, if people require that they are better off getting either native or tunneled IPv6 instead of this transition method especially because of the low deployment of 6to4 relays. > I think this is because 2002: is a test zone. But for me using > it almost always the only way to have reverse mapping is ip6.int. Get yourself a tunneled or native prefix from a LIR closeby. 6to4 is not testing, it is transition and it works(tm). Greets, Jeroen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int. Comment: Jeroen Massar / http://unfix.org/~jeroen iQA/AwUBQD8r8CmqKFIzPnwjEQKKHgCgqUR7Pj9cTamJlNBTEknTyF7k4BcAoKQP mum12QVg91rWgM2R2sqNDjU8 =6MzS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|