[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] RE: [sig-ipv6] Re: 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?)
Thank you. /jim
-----Original Message----- From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com [mailto:bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 7:20 AM To: Bound, Jim Cc: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com; Jeroen Massar; Anand Kumria; Rob Blokzijl; v6ops@ops.ietf.org; sig-ipv6@apnic.net; ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [sig-ipv6] Re: 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?)
both ip6.arpa and ip6.int
--bill
P.S. Bill - the new initial IPv6 AAA at root for JP and KR
use ipv6.arpa? Thanks.
/jim
-----Original Message----- From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 5:45 PM To: Jeroen Massar Cc: Anand Kumria; Rob Blokzijl; v6ops@ops.ietf.org; sig-ipv6@apnic.net; ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [sig-ipv6] Re: 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?)
whjile i applaud each and everyone who has expunged all ip6.int from their lives, the fact of the matter is that IETF fiat or no, there exist -many- systems that can only use reverse maps in the ip6.int tree.
it will be maintained as long as there are queries for it. for those of you for whom ip6.int is a distant memory, pleae understand and respect the fact that you can not, despite public posturing, force others to change their systems. to practically remove ip6.int incures real cost in both time and cash. in the US there is a term for what the IETF is trying to do w/ ip6.int. Its called an unfunded mandate. Unless or until the good folk in the IETF who are calling for the removal of ip6.int are ready to put up the cash to effect real change, I wish they would stop.
On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 09:58, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> On 2004-07-22, at 09.43, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > But indeed, if there is concensus or not 9/9/2004 and ip6.int > > is gone for me. > > I vote for 9/9/2004 and getting rid of it properly. Maintaining > two reverse threes will create more problems than it will solve.
What, specifically, is the hurry?
That this has been overdue for three years already and
though the deprecation was marked in August 2001 some vendors still not have done the change. And as it is a s/ip6.int/ip6.arpa/g which is very easy, if vendors did not do that yet they are way overdue and you got to wonder how much their interest is in keeping software upto date.
Basically we (at least me) have been waiting for the 6bone to get the delegation so that we could remove the 2 trees and only keep one: ip6.arpa. This was decided by the IAB thus we should
If we do not remove ip6.int then still implementations
not show up. They have had 3 years already to update...
Take your pick:
http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-
removal-00.html
http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-
removal-00.txt
http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-
removal-00.xml
Short, quick and easy. If no comments are risen for 16:00 today I'll submit
using it will this as an ID.
Comments: e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa was documented in RFC3681
2004 and actioned in July 2004.
Added, but note that this was all long overdue and
number of other solutions that would have worked already 2 years ago if there had not been any of the political arguments holding back this technical issue. Note also that 6bone will end per 6/6/6 and that it is a TESTbed. The TESTbed is delaying and thus hurting the production networks in this case.
I'm assuming the actioning of e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa is the trigger for this I-D; if so, why do you want to wait so
are they to that even live up to it. published in February there where a little time (2
months) between e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa becoming available and requiring people to have updated resolver libraries?
People should have updated their resolvers in the last *3 years*. If you have not done that already then you are not maintaining your machines properly and there is a big chance that you have bigger problems than a IPv6 reverse DNS that doesn't work anymore because ip6.int is gone.
Personally I'd be more in favour of a 6 month timeout - i.e around last December or so.
Of course the date is up to discussion, but IMHO: ASAP and at least before the end of the year, the sooner the better.
Note that Cisco's IOS updates will be done before that date and Windows XP2 will come out in August (they say) thus everybody using IPv6 has time enough to upgrade. All "free unix flavors" already support it
Also users agree: http://www.sixxs.net/forum/?msg=general-83948 Note the begin date of that thread, we where really waiting for 6bone just as being nice to the people still using it.
On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 10:57, Rob Blokzijl wrote:
If no comments are risen for 16:00 today I'll submit this as an ID.
two minor points. In the abstract and the introduction you write:
RFC 3152 delegates IP6.ARPA for reverse IPv6 delegations. For RIRs (RIPE,ARIN,APNIC,LACNIC and soon AFNIC)
Replace RIPE --> RIPE NCC
That I did that wrong is a major oops, I should by know the difference by now.
Replace AFNIC --> AFRINIC
(AFNIC is the .fr registry :-) )
Also adjusted and added some xref's in the XML.
Old version is now draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00.a new version carries the draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00 name.
Greets, Jeroen
* sig-ipv6: APNIC SIG on IPv6 technology and policy issues * _______________________________________________ sig-ipv6 mailing list sig-ipv6@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-ipv6
participants (1)
-
Bound, Jim