[dns-operations] Missing .us and GTLD records??
uribarri at alum.mit.edu
Wed May 19 21:03:53 UTC 2010
Now I'm a bit confused, if "J" was also a member of an IPv4 anycast cloud,
why not publish it? And if that can't be done, just pubish the same IPv4
as one of the other working letters.
I know it will be a very very long time before I (and the majority of
the internet) can talk IPv6 natively. Is our punishment for that to be cut
off from "J".
I can update all my tools, but that is still not going to get me to be
able to talk to "J".
Seams like it could be fixed, but I would say that my resolver not being
able to talk to "2 out of 9" of the auth servers for the TLD is
a nice side effect.
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Edward Lewis wrote:
> At 14:52 -0400 5/19/10, Luis Uribarri wrote:
> Speaking as the operator of dotUS...
>> Personally, I think that DNS "Authoritative Servers" should be the last
>> things that go IPv6 only, specifically becasue of the transport issues,
>> but I guess the TLD operators sees it differently.
> The choice we had for "J" was to give it an IPv6 address or none at all. It
> was simply an opportunity to add one more machine that could answer on the
> IPv6 network (or to that fragment that could reach it). For those that care,
> the host assigned the "J" AAAA record was also a member of an IPv4 anycast
> cloud and just happened to have native IPv6 transit available.
> We are not taking a position on IPv4 vs. IPv6. We want to offer services on
> both transports. We are not in the business of promoting one or the other.
> OTOH, it happens that our IPv6-only server has raised awareness of some to
> update their tools. That is a nice side effect, but hardly our intention.
> Edward Lewis
> NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468
> Discussing IPv4 address policy is like deciding what to eat on the Titanic.
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
More information about the dns-operations