[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] IPv6 reverse DNS meeting at last IETF

David,

Two points:

1.  The RIR CEOs sent a message to the IAB requesting a waiver on the
RFC 3152 requirement and received a positive response.

2.  The RIR engineering staffs are working out the implementation
details and should have something ready shortly.

Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf
Of
> David Kessens
> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 7:50 PM
> To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net; dns-wg at ripe.net
> Subject: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] IPv6 reverse DNS meeting at last IETF
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I would like to share with you the results of a private discussion
> that started at a meeting at the last IETF regarding IPv6 reverse
> delegation issues. The group of people was an ad-hoc group which is
> worried that the process for moving to ip6.arpa is stagnating.
> 
> People involved in the discussion were:
> 
> Kurt Erik Lindqvist
> David Kessens
> Johan Ihren
> Andrei Robachevsky
> Patrik Faltstrom
> Jim Reid
> 
> The topic of the meeting was IPv6 reverse DNS.
> 
> We agreed on the following:
> 
> - the move to ip6.arpa is not on track
> 
> - it's probably best that we start to give attention to this problem
>   in the DNS wg to avoid any duplication in efforts.
> 
>   (BTW this also means that the chairs of the ipv6 wg and DNS wg need
>    a meeting schedule that will allow IPv6 wg participants to attend
>    the DNS wg - we, Jim Reid & David Kessens, have already made this
>    very clear to the RIPE NCC).
> 
> - Andrei made it clear that the RIPE NCC wants to move forward with
>   a pragmatic approach
> 
> - we should stop making further delegations in ip6.int (in so far that
>   this is within our powers, at the minimum we can recommend this)
> 
> - we should make it possible that 3ffe address holders can start
>   getting reverse delegations in ip6.arpa.
>   This is important because it will allow software coders/vendors
>   to do look ups in ip6.arpa only instead of doing kludges by looking
>   in both or in the wrong one (ip6.int)
>   we think this is important to get started as soon as possible since
>   software tends to stay alive longer than desirable
> 
>   Andrei/RIPE NCC was going to ask IAB and/or other powers that be to
>   get this moving. We as a community should help if necessary by a
>   supporting statement.
> 
>   (Andrei already sent his request and is working on a proposal for
>    implementation)
> 
> - 6to4 reverse delegation
> 
>   We discussed this topic briefly as a lesser priority item.
> 
>   As 6to4 is a transition mechanism for networks that can not get
>   native access to v6, we concluded that reverse delegation might not
>   be that important for the 6to4 addresses.
> 
>   This is clearly a point for more discussion for the DNS wg.
> 
> Obviously, this is just the opinion of a small group - your
> comments are welcome! Please follow up to the dns-wg list only (unless
> you don't agree on moving this topic to the dns-wg in the first
> place :-)).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> David K.
> ---