Re: (ngtrans) Re: reverse delegation under ip6.arpa.?

[Bill Manning <bmanning@zed.isi.edu>]

	I don't know whom the appropriate people are, but as the
	administrator of the existing ipv6 delegations other than
	the RIR ones, I would have hoped to have been included in
	the process. This is the first I've heard of such a meeting.




On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 02:03:32PM +0100, Bruce Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, JINMEI Tatuya wrote:
> 
> > > agreed.  but the pain is minimal.  note that, initially, the content of
> > > ip6.arpa is directly that of ip6.int.  in fact, one could have the same
> > > zone file pointed to by both names.  the big pain in the transition is
> > > that of the registries, whois, etc.  and they've been working on this
> > > for some months.
> >
> > As for the registry side transition, I have another question.  I saw
> > delegations for 2001:0200::/24 to APNIC.  What is the current status
> > about 3ffe::/16?  Is there a plan to delegate ip6.arpa. sub domains
> > for that block?
> 
> This is not known, and no delegation exists in ip6.arpa for the 6bone
> (e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa).  The focus so far in ip6.arpa delegation process has
> been on the RIR delegations.  I have forwarded the question to the
> appropriate people who will be meeting during IETF-52, and an answer
> should be available then.  ( I'm actually not attending this IETF )
> 
> One *possible* and easy solution would be to DNAME the e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa to
> e.f.f.3.ip6.int ( I'm ignoring technical issues of having to first
> delegate f.f.3.ip6.arpa to a DNAME-capable set of nameservers first ).
> 
> This has the good side of preserving current functionality when the
> deployed resolver bas looks at ip6.arpa instead of ip6.int.  It has the
> down side of effectively limiting 6bone to using 'ip6.int' as you cannot
> then DNAME back into the ip6.arpa tree.  Somehow I don't think that such a
> restriction is what the 6bone community wants.
> 
> No matter what technical tricks are down further up in the tree by the
> RIRs/ICANN etc, the change in the root ip6 tree *will* require *all*
> currently deployed delegations to make *some* sort of change.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- 
>                              Bruce Campbell                            RIPE
>                                                                         NCC
>                                                                  Operations