v6ops 質疑応答そのまま

hi I'm Rio from University of Glasgow um thank you very much um for the talk I think right now I think DNS is one of the tricky part of moving on to V6 only and I think one of the tricky thing about moving to V6 is once again if you leave any of the V4 compatible bit or first to keep it then people won't be forced to move on I think so um thank you very much for your work and I think it should just be um go should go ahead as an informational I think it is a very useful thing to document and keep in the RFC thank you

mark um I'm very much in two minds about this that merge request has been seen around for three years um now um if you go ipv if if a site is going to go IPv6 only it has to make a decision about whether it is going to what ipv4 as a service it is going to use and DNS and dns64 is a lousy service really really really really really lousy worrying about a node having a stub ipv ipv4 service so it can do clatt circle on a clat or similar orwe've got plenty of ipv4 as a services they can all run down to the node without applications having to do crap like this I'm gonna I wrote the crap in that click that commit um we we had too many we had too many ipv4 as a Services as a moment at the moment and assuming that net six dns-64 is the one that people are going to be used is also very much up there um it's something that we really should be trying to stop having to do more and more and more fixes for Nat six four the correction Den SX4 and this is we keep finding more and more things that dns64 doesn't work with we knew it didn't work with when I was put up in behave it was promised to be a short-lived solution it is now plus 10 years that is not short-lived that's just my view

okay okay so uh um I can't object to that I can't say anything to that but um as a person who like uses these mechanisms um using DNS 64 and not six four is the easiest for people to use because I just need to set up a dns64 I don't need to set up silats to the end hosts so like it's very easy to just set up a dinner six foot so I think that's why people still use DNS 64 and um if people still using it I thought it might because this draft isn't going to make people use DNS 6 for more it's not going to increase the number of people using dns-64 it's just gonna increase the people creating uh iterated resolver inside of DNS 64.64 environment so um yeah that's my response

David uh David lampader um I

I would like to note especially in response to mark that this doesn't really have a dependency or or like there's no dns64 inherently in this um so even if I have an IPv6 only Network and I don't do not six four uh for my applications this can help me achieve IPv6 only connectivity to some domain that happens to only have before authoritative name servers so I may end up having to use this just to get native mistakes working because the domains aren't updating and I don't even have the ns64 really I just have this weight for my for my resolver to reach before only domains in the internet can I uh come back with this David um it's this is a DNS 64 Only Solution really because if you have deployed 464x slack properly you do not need this if you have deployed DS Light properly you do not need this if you have deployed map T properly you do not need this I can go through the list of all the other ipv as a service mechanisms I don't want to deploy any of those well then you can also fold out for the queries selectively floor forward ipv4 Aquarius Library vs4 services to a service the other side of to the other side of a of the IPv6 only link now this service requires you to have a nat64 so you've implicitly deployed either nap either dns64 net64 64s x-lap or map t to be in this position to begin with

I would like to Lake Lorenzo speak and then give Jane a few minutes to talk about her draft

y sort of agreeing with David here I think um deploying a Nats Explorer is really really really easy you put it in the network you point 64 ff9b at it and you're done right so this is also really easy right if you have some code on DNS in a recursive it works deploying ipv4 as a service is kind of more difficult you need to like deal with ipv4 if you have a server like Linux that doesn't do clap then it's kind of annoying right you need to set up ipv4 dhp servers or whatever other like you know annoying stuff that's you know not well integrated with distros today so this is sort of a much lower cost option I can see why we don't want to support e0964 with lots of hacks and you know these two implementations may decide to reject these pull requests because it's like you know too much complexity but I do see a niche for this you know it's just easy and not super harmful.