Re: comments on ipv6-transport-guidelines-00

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

Responding to two issues only, on "dual-stack" use and on "zone validation 
process".

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Alain Durand wrote:
> >==> the other thing to clarify might be "dual stack".  Again, if one 
> >wanted to be entirely accurate, the question is about whether the DNS 
> >server software is programmed (and enabled) for the both IP versions while 
> >the node is dual-stack.  I'm not sure how important this clarification is.
> >
> >   In order to enforce the second point, the zone validation process
> >   SHOULD ensure that there is at least one IPv4 address record
> >   available for the name servers of any child delegations within the
> >   zone.
> >
> We could be pedantic and say:
> "the server software has to be dual stack, configured to listen for IPv6
> traffic, on a dual stack host where IPv6 is turned on, an a network
> annoncing and routing Ipv6 packets to the big Internet...."
> I think that "dual stack" is a nice shortcut that everybody understand.

I agree that we definitely need a short-cut in this text.  But still, I
think we need to define it in the very beginning in the terminology
section.  Using something else than "dual-stack" has both drawbacks and
advantages.

IMHO, using dual-stack in the text would probably be all right assuming we
coined up what exactly we mean (and how it may differ from other
interpretations) by dual-stack in this context in the terminology.

So, having some other term could be simpler as it doesn't already have
connotations (dual-stack _can_ be interpreted to mean just a system which
implements dual-stack, period) in people's minds, but if we can't figure
out anything fancy, DS is probably ok with above reservations.
 
> >==> what is this "zone validation process"?  where is it defined?  where 
> >is it done (dns regisrars, dns software etc.)?
> 
> This happens in several places, software are developped for this.

Yes, I've seen the reports from such software.

> Before delegating a zone, numberof registrars insist on some
> kind of a zone check. I'm not sure there is much value in
> explaining this process in details.

OK, I think we have to be clear here that the DNS specification does not 
mandate such zone validation checks, and this is (just) a sometimes (or 
even "often", not sure) done additional sanity check.

For example, rephrase:

   In order to enforce the second point, the zone validation process
   SHOULD ensure that there is at least one IPv4 address record
   available for the name servers of any child delegations within the
   zone.

to:

   In order to help enforcing the second point, the optional operational 
   zone validation processes SHOULD ensure that there is at least one IPv4
   address record available for the name servers of any child delegations 
   within the zone.
 
-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.