[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-08.txt



> Hi,
> 
> >OK. Lot of shouting since this was sent but not much new text.
> >
> >How about
> >
> >     Locally assigned ULA AAAA records MUST NOT appear in the global DNS,
> >     since there is an extremely small probability that the corresponding
> >     addresses are not unique. Even though these addresses will be
> >     unrouteable in the global Internet, their leakage via DNS is highly
> >     undesirable. Such AAAA records MAY appear in local regions of the DNS
> >     corresponding to their region of routeability.
> >
> >(And I would put an equivalent SHOULD NOT on centrally assigned ULAs.)
> 
> While I am sure everyone in this discussion has read the DNS text in the 
> current draft, here it is just in case:
> 
>     4.4 DNS Issues
> 
>     At the present time AAAA and PTR records for locally assigned local
>     IPv6 addresses are not recommended to be installed in the global DNS.
>     The operational issues relating to this are beyond the scope of this
>     document.
> 
>     For background on this recommendation, the concern about adding AAAA
>     and PTR records to the global DNS for locally assigned local IPv6
>     addresses stems from the lack of complete assurance that the prefixes
>     are unique.  There is a small possibility that the same PTR record
>     might be registered by two different organizations.  Due to this
>     concern, adding AAAA records is thought to be unwise because matching
>     PTR records can not be registered.
> 
> This text (in my view) is more or less equivalent to what is proposed 
> above.  The text in the draft doesn't use the upper case MUST/SHOULD 
> language since this part of the document is operational guidelines and that 
> language doesn't seem appropriate.  I suppose something with lower case 
> must/should would work.
> 
> My personal view is that this is about all we can say now in this 
> document.  I continue to think that what is needed is a separate draft that 
> discusses this topic in detail.  This document might even relax the 
> recommendation if warranted.  It would be a good place to describe 
> different approaches to the locally and centrally assigned ULAs as well.
> 
> Chair hat on:
> 
> The -08 draft is currently in the IESG.  Almost all of the Discuss votes 
> have been cleared.  If we can go with the current text it may result in the 
> document being approved soon.  The more we try to fine tune it there is a 
> risk of further delay.
> 
> It would be good if we could move forward on this document.
> 
> Bob

	Which completely ignores the operational problems caused by
	leaking reverse lookups.  We know these will exist and we
	need to take steps to prevent them.

	The only complaint I saw against my proposed text was the level
	of proscription against adding AAAA LAU LAs to the global DNS.

	Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

	Mark

> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@xxxxxxxx
> Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@xxxxxxxx
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------