Re: v4/v6 dns thoughts?

[Måns Nilsson <mansaxel () besserwisser org>]

Subject: Re: v4/v6 dns thoughts? Date: Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:01:15AM -0400 Quoting Andrew Parnell (andrew () parnell 
ca):
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
> > I also don't recommend doing the foo.v4/foo.v6 thing in your forwards. There's
> > really no advantage to do it. Most tools either have separate IPv4/IPv6 variants
> > or have command-line switches for address-family control if you care.
>
> For most tools that I ordinarily use, I would certainly agree with
> this.  The only exception might be from a web browser; while there are
> ways that they can be reconfigured to only use certain IP versions in
> certain cases, it is probably more straightforward to use
> www.ipvN.domain.tld or a similar name.
>
> For reverse DNS, I completely agree that there is no reason to use a
> different name.

While I am no enemy to /56 allocations (cross-thread alert!) I for the
most part tend to agree with Owen and would so here too. Possibly with the
addition of separate names in a subdomain for trouble-shooting. Selecting
protocol is something best done slightly lower in the stack. I did so
with $INCLUDE directives[0] at a former employer. For routers, where it
matters much more than for end-user stuff like web servers.
 

-- 
Måns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE                             +46 705 989668
DIDI ... is that a MARTIAN name, or, are we in ISRAEL?


[0] Like so: 
        $ORIGIN isp.tld.
        $INCLUDE "file-with-AAAA-records-without-FQDN"
        $INCLUDE "file-with-A-records-without-FQDN"
        $ORIGIN v4.isp.tld.
        $INCLUDE "file-with-A-records-without-FQDN"
        $ORIGIN v6.isp.tld.
        $INCLUDE "file-with-AAAA-records-without-FQDN"

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature