Hi David & all, Please find my comments below in sections G and K : On 28 May, David Kessens wrote: | I would like to thank the scribe for writing down the minutes. | | The minutes will be declared final by June 7th if there are no | objections raised and/or major changes required. | | Thanks, | | David K. | --- [...] | | ======================== | G. IPv6 RR DNS - is it ip6.int or ip6.arpa? Why? Documented where? | ======================== | | Joao Luis Silva Damas presentation is available at | | http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/archive/ripe-42/presentations/ripe42-ipv6-... | | The recommendation is to populate ip6.arpa and phase out ip6.int - but what is | wanted and how shall we proceed? | | ?: Software currently relies on ip6.int - you can't just switch it off. | ?: Can't we just duplicate the delegation-records? | GD: A good solution would be a CNAME very high in the hierarchy | DK: Can't we just do automatic delegation in both domains? | Joao: ip6.int should be abandoned soon - if we duplicate it will not go away. | GD: But older machines all use ip6.int. | Joao: OK, for the time being both delegations are possible. But should it be | done automatically or do we only delegate in ip6.int if someone really | wants it? | GD: RIPE NCC should investigate if it's possible to do away with ip6.int and | make a solution with CNAMEs. Make some experiments and report at RIPE 43 | | ACTION on RIPE NCC: Investigate the CNAME solution for v6-reverse delegation. | | Wilfried Woeber: Automatic delegation for ip6.int and ip6.arpa appears the | best solution, but if someone requests different delegations | in ip6.arpa and ip6.int, RIPE NCC should not prevent this. | Mohsen Suissis: RIPE NCC did this in the past, at least for 2002:0660::/35 ==> ^ (no "s" at the end ;-)) | both delegations were made. ===> If my memory serves me well, what was meant by "automatic delegation" was the fact that reverse zone delegation had to be set automatically while delegating the /35 (or /32 in the future) under ip6.arpa. I said that DNS reverse delegation MUST NOT BE DONE AT THE PARENT ZONE BEFORE MAKING SURE THE CHILDREN (master & slaves) ARE READY. Then I remember that Joao told me that RIPE NCC have never done that (automatic reverse zone delegation under ip6.arpa) so far. Then I gave the example of the reverse zone of 2002:0660::/35 which was delegated under .ip6.arpa without knowing whether the supposed authoritative serves were ready or not. I hope this is clear now ;-) | ======================== | K. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond | French NIC initiative regarding DNSv6 deployment | ======================== | | Mohsen Suissis presentation is available at ==> ^ | http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/archive/ripe-42/presentations/ripe42-ipv6-... | | Mohsen Suissis pointed out that currently not many TLD-Nameservers are native ^ | v6-speakers. AFNIC is willing to help other NICs to roll out v6 DNS. | | AFNIC also applied to become secondary for ip6.arpa. The request was submitted | to IANA but nothing happened so far. Regards, Mohsen.