[as112-ops] Section 4.4 of RFC 4193 and AS112

[William F. Maton Sotomayor]

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Daniele Arena wrote:

> What about the other IPv6 zones mentioned in Mark's draft that might
> need a "sacrificial server" (see section 4)? Should AS112 cover them as
> well?

I'd like to see those as well.  I focused on the ULA stuff largely due to 
the sudden increase in message traffic on the NANOG mailing list in 
response to ARIN's statement about IPv6 and questions sent to me privately 
about ULA space.

There's also the issue of whether or not AS112 servers should get an IPv6 
address for anycast purposes, i.e. getting AS112 onto IPv6 infrastructure 
where available and answering on IPv6 sockets.

Of course, if Marc's draft moves to RFC and DNS implementors follow it, 
maybe the day will come that AS112 becomes obsolete...but I think it would 
be a long time before we see AS112 traffic drop in proportion to people 
moving to newer versions of DNS server software.

wfms