[dns-operations] 答复: L-Root IPv6 Address renumbering
terry.manderson at icann.org
Mon Mar 14 04:07:46 UTC 2016
On 14/03/2016, 12:52 PM, "Stephan Lagerholm" <stlagerh at microsoft.com>
>I find the renumbering schedule rather aggressive and I disagree that DNS
>resolver operators are treated as children should the timeframe be
Excuse my flippant words.
However, that tends not to correlate with what appears as an ongoing
outcome for in other renumbering efforts. And I don't think it is at all
>The operation of the root zone is critical, there is a reason why there
>are 13 operators. And no recursive software would try all 11+13 existing
>addresses before giving up and returning SERVFAIL, at best I would expect
>3 or perhaps 4 tries before that happens.
>Has the timeline been discussed in the Root Server System Advisory
>Committee where you are a member? Are all the members in agreement that
>best operational practice is to shut down an old address 6 months after
To answer the point question, has this been discussed at RSSAC? No it has
not. This is an operational change being made by the operator of L-root.
Should RSSAC and the RSSAC Caucus which to discuss and publish a
recommendation for the pre/post process of implementing such operational
changes, they are free to do so.
You will find information on how to join the RSSAC caucus here:
I welcome you to join and contribute.
>It does not seem to be to be a large operational burden to keep the old
>address longer, what is the driving force behind this aggressive timeline?
Again, my opinion here will differ as to what the operation burden is, and
what is aggressive.
However it's good to know Microsoft is aware of the change. Does Microsoft
ship updated root hints with its DNS Server? and when will they commence
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 6343 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the dns-operations