North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?

  • From: Michael.Dillon
  • Date: Fri Nov 12 05:59:12 2004

> Wow, IPv6 misinformation is reaching unprecendented heights here on 
> NANOG...

http://www.ipv6forum.org leads to lots of basic resources 
that will help you understand IPv6. 

> Quite the opposite. There was A6 support in BIND AFAIK, but it's 
> removed as it's unworkable. Learn to love AAAA.

Found this statement in this IPv6 Howto
http://www.join.uni-muenster.de/Dokumente/Howtos/Howto_IPv6-Nameservice.php?lang=en

    Without going further into details, please note that these 
    new records and notations were "deprecated". After RFC2874 
    was published, the internet community raised fears that 
    chained resource records would slow down name lookups, 
    would raise the danger of severe misconfiguration and 
    might even break the nameservice. Due to this, A6 and 
    DNAME records were degraded to experimental (RFC3363), 
    which practically means 'deprecated'. Further information 
    why this was necessary is explained in RFC3364. 

If you need to know more, check the two RFCs.

> Regardless of the merit of NAT, there is little merit in IPv6+NAT as it 
> has all the downsides of both. If you can live with NAT, stay in IPv4 
> and talk to the IPv6 world over IPv4<->IPv6 NAT.

Or upgrade to NAP (Network Architecture Protection) *grin*

--Michael Dillon