[dns-wg] v6 ns/glue naming bcp

% Jim Reid wrote:
% 
% > Indeed. However I wonder how much legacy IPv6 stuff exists and whether
% there's no "legacy IPv6" but a lot of EDNS0-unaware ("legacy") mostly
% IPv4 based clients, which have to deal with what fits into 512 bytes.

	To some degree, the 512 byte limit is part of the DNS protocol.
	RFC 1034 is reasonably clear on this.  

% > legacy stuff would continue with 512 byte payloads. It would see the
% > largely IPv4 internet just as they do right now, unless those clients
% > explicitly queried for (say) a AAAA record.
% 
% 1886bis, currently in "AUTH48" state, instead modified all additional
% section processing from "add A" to "add A and AAAA".

	It would perhaps be useful to review the respsize draft that
	is circulating in the DNSOPS w/g.  And I am informed that
	the 8.4.1 and the 9.2.3 code attempt to "shuffle" the data
	in the additional section processing step to first send out 
	glue of the type that the request came in on. e.g. query over
	v4, get A's first,  query over v6, AAAAs first.
	
 
% > compatibility for the probably small installed base of existing IPv6
% > devices with resolvers that can't or won't be upgraded.
% 
% I agree that the currently installed base of IPv6 hosts could be required
% to change, but I'm not concerned about those anyway.

	pretty much any resolver code shipped since 1998 understands
	IPv6 rrs. Not sure O'dells law still holds.


--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).