Delegation of 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
draft-ymbk-6to4-arpa-delegation-00
Discuss
Yes
(Russ Housley)
(Thomas Narten)
No Objection
(Alex Zinin)
(Bill Fenner)
(Harald Alvestrand)
(Jon Peterson)
(Margaret Cullen)
(Ned Freed)
(Steven Bellovin)
Recuse
(Randy Bush)
No Record
Deb Cooley
Erik Kline
Francesca Palombini
Gunter Van de Velde
Jim Guichard
John Scudder
Mahesh Jethanandani
Murray Kucherawy
Orie Steele
Paul Wouters
Roman Danyliw
Warren Kumari
Zaheduzzaman Sarker
Éric Vyncke
Summary: Needs a YES. Needs 10 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.
Deb Cooley
No Record
Erik Kline
No Record
Francesca Palombini
No Record
Gunter Van de Velde
No Record
Jim Guichard
No Record
John Scudder
No Record
Mahesh Jethanandani
No Record
Murray Kucherawy
No Record
Orie Steele
No Record
Paul Wouters
No Record
Roman Danyliw
No Record
Warren Kumari
No Record
Zaheduzzaman Sarker
No Record
Éric Vyncke
No Record
Bert Wijnen Former IESG member
(was No Objection)
Discuss
Discuss
[Treat as non-blocking comment]
(2003-10-16)
Unknown
From OPS directorate: > 1) normative reference to (expired!) draft-moore-6to4-dns it is not shown as normative in the document > and it is indeed normative since draft-ymbk-6to4-arpa-delegation > does not even describe the mechanism except via this normative > reference. but your point that it should be is well taken. > 2) draft-moore-6to4-dns section 3.1 says "for every NS resource > record that refers queries for a portion of IN-ADDR.ARPA space to > some set of DNS servers, we want to behave as if there were a > similar NS record for the portion of IP6.ARPA space corresponding > to those IPv4 addresses, in the absence of any explicit NS > records for those names in IP6.ARPA space. ie, there are no real > IP6.ARPA NS RRs here, and address-to-name code has to know about > this hack. > > my (perhaps incorrect) understanding of the intent of > draft-ymbk-6to4-arpa-delegation from previous discussion was that > it intended to propose creation of real IP6.ARPA NS RRs along the > existing administrative hierarchy, which would remove the need to > deploy knowledge of this hack in address-to-name code. > > so i'm now confused. i like what i thought i'd heard better (real > NS RRs) than what i found just now (behave as if). but i may just > be confused here, one could make a case that real NS RRs create > more work for registries in order to save code work for folks who > already have to be running special code in order to run 6to4 at > all. but addresses leak, so it's not immediately obvious that only > hosts that speak 6to4 will need to perform address->name > translation of 6to4 addresses. > > i hope i'm just missing something due to reading in a hurry. nope. i think there are actual issues.
Russ Housley Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Thomas Narten Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Alex Zinin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Bill Fenner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Harald Alvestrand Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Jon Peterson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Margaret Cullen Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ned Freed Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Steven Bellovin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ted Hardie Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2003-10-15)
Unknown
I don't want to block this document, but I agree with mrw that the pointer to Keith's expired
document is pretty weak, and that it seems to be an "informative" reference primarily because it
is expired. I'm also a little queasy about saying "delegate this to RIRs as described in
$does_not_exist". I think a reference to that document is needed, even if all it says is the sentence
following:
Names within this zone are to be further delegated within
the regional IP registries and ISPs in accordance with the delegation
of IPv4 address space.
If there will be no IAB doc, because the sentence above means it is not needed,
let's suggest it get cut out.
Randy Bush Former IESG member
Recuse
Recuse
()
Unknown