Facebook over IPv6
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Mon Jun 13 14:13:19 CEST 2011
On 2011-06-13 21:07, Gert Doering wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 07:53:45PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
>> For example, if I get a request from foo.com for an AAAA record for
>> www.some-domain.com that arrives over IPv4 when I have a v6 server in
>> whois, I might treat that request differently than a request that
>> arrives via v6 for the same resource. The reason is that if the request
> This idea keeps coming up again and again, and there still is no evidence
> that the protocol that a client's resolver uses to reach an authoritative
> DNS server has *ANY* relationship whatsoever to the protocol that the
> client itself might prefer to use to reach the server.
> All our clients use our (ISP's) recursive resolver, and these resolvers
> are fully dual stacked, both to the client and to the server.
> Now, if the client is fully v6 capable, asks our recursor over v6, and
> the recursor decides to send the query via v4 to your authoritative
> server (for whatever reason), our v6-enabled client won't see your
> v6-enabled server. Strikes me as "not what you want to achieve".
> Vice versa, if we have a v4-only client that uses our recursor, and
> the recursor sends the query over v6 to you - what have you learned
> about the client's capabilities? Nothing.
Not to mention that Windows XP users (of whom there are countless millions,
some of whom have IPv6 running) can only resolve DNS over IPv4 despite
having a complete dual stack in all other respects.
> This is a bad idea, because it completely neglects that there are
> recursive servers in between that have a different set of capabilities
> *and problems* than the clients using them.
> The idea doesn't get any better by being brought up at least once a
> month somewhere.
> Gert Doering
> -- NetMaster
More information about the ipv6-ops