[6bone] DNS support for IPv6

[Christian Nickel]

Hi,

> On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 19:00, Fernando Gont wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I'm just about to write a brief explanation about the RRs that need to be 
> > added to the ones described in RFC 1034 / 1035, in order to add support for 
> > IPv6.
> > 
> > I've read RFC 3363, and it recommends that RFC 1886 stay on standards track 
> > and be advanced, and to move RFC 2874 to Experimental status.
> > 
> > Shall I make comments on AAAA records, and don't even mention A6 records?
> 
> Currently, most IPv6 software only supports AAAA records, however IIRC,
> A6 records haven't died as a proposed standard (or I disagree eith it if
> they have).  Only DNAME has that I'm aware of.  If I'm worng, please,
> someone tell me. I'd mention the A6 RR, is it's rather nifty if I say so
> myself.
> 
> The only problem is when using them for critical records like MX or NS,
> but then most people forget that you can use the whole address with a
> prefixlen of 0...djb forgot that, IIRC...or at least, neglects to
> mention it to assist him in spreading FUD.
> 
> In short, mention it!  At least, that's my opinion.
> 
> > About address mapping, RFC 3152 says IP6.ARPA should be used, instead IP6.INT.
> > The same here: shall I omit the description of IP6.INT, or it is still 
> > being used, and so, I should describe it?
> 
> At this point, the only network using ip6.int is the 6bone, afaik.  I
> would mention it as such.

Currently you can use both ip6.int and ip6.arpa with 3ffe::/16 and 2001::/16,
but ip6.arpa should be preferred.

> 
> > TIA,
> > Fernando Gont
> > e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar

Greets,
 Christian