nanog mailing list archives
Re: Public DNS64
From: Jima <nanog () jima us>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 16:31:39 -0600
On 2014-08-15 16:11, Mark Andrews wrote:
For a public DNS64 service you also need a public NAT64.
Not necessarily. If the public DNS64 server is using the well-known prefix 64:ff9b::/96 (from RFC6052), then all an eyeball network needs to do is route that /96 toward their own NAT64 environment.
Jima
Current thread:
- Public DNS64 Tim Durack (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Rubens Kuhl (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Tim Durack (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Mark Andrews (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Jima (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Mark Andrews (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Tim Durack (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Rubens Kuhl (Aug 15)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Public DNS64 Mark Andrews (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Larry Sheldon (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Jima (Aug 15)
- Re: Public DNS64 Niels Bakker (Aug 16)