On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 21:10 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Michael Dillon:
If RIPE really and truly believes that IPv6 will become the future core protocol of the public Internet, then RIPE should allocate an IPv6 /32 to every RIPE member who has PI addresses.
No, if everyone believed that IPv6 is the future, policies would not matter much, and there would be little fighting. Everyone would jump through almost any hoop to get what they think they need. 8-)
But this is not the case. I don't follow the v6 wars closely, but it appears that several promised improvements over v4 won't be delivered (look at the A6/bitlabel/DNAME deprecation, or even the protocol design optimized for forwarding implementations which now are being phased out).
A6 could cause a long chain of servers to be asked where 1 lookup is enough for normal reverse queries. Also things as signing would become a large Bitlabel is just a different way of writing down reverses, which btw would be incompatible with A6. DNAME exists and is being used. It is sort of a Domain CNAME :) How else did you think I aliased ip6.int to ip6.arpa for silly slow people who do not upgrade their DNS resolvers. The "protocol design optimized for forwarding implementations". You can be referring to a couple of things here, though I can tell you that the header structure is aligned and there is no checksumming anymore, as the hardware layer usually already does that. This speeds IPv6 up already by a couple of factors compared to IPv4, even though one has to look at a 128bit address instead of a IPv4 one. Anything else? Greets, Jeroen