Subject: Proposal for shutdown of ip6.int?

From: "Jeroen Massar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:26:00 +0100

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hi,

Now that we have seen a RFC arise for e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa
and there apparently will be a deployment shortly,
wouldn't it be a good idea to start planning a closure
of the usage of ip6.int ?

ip6.arpa was set as a standard 2 years ago by RFC3152
which is also a BCP.

All software vendors have to do is s/ip6.int/ip6.arpa/
in their code. They don't need any fallbacks to ip6.int
thus there should be no big coding problem.
As for the existing deployments, they already knew for
2 years that this was going to happen.

To give the people in 6bone some time to create a
ip6.arpa version of their zone by doing some mv's and
reloading their nameserver and to, not forget, let
the operators of e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa create the delegations
to the pTLA's, which are going per 6/6/6 and let IANA
have some time to actually delegate the tree a date
should be picked somewhat over a year in the future.

I propose 6/6/2005 as a nice cutoff date for ip6.int.

This should give enough time to let above things happen.
People not updating in this timeframe, won't update anyways.

Greets,
 Jeroen

PS: Yes, I am still using 6bone space myself.

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:03:25 +0100

In your previous mail you wrote:

   
=> IMHO it will take more time to forget ip6.int than to move
all 6bone nodes to RIR allocated stuff. So if we need easy to
remember dates I think that 6/7/2008 is better.

=> 5 year old is not very old for a box...

=> me too (:-)!

Regards

[email-masked]

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:14:59 +0200 (EET)

> of the usage of ip6.int ?

Hasn't that closure already been planned a couple of years ago? Due to
some techno-political crap it just never seems to happen :)

As soon as the 6bone space is available through ip6.arpa, I think the
resolvers should remove support for ip6.int.  That'll force (more or
less) people who wouldn't be otherwise bothered to change from ip6.int 
to ip6.arpa.

Or, if that just doesn't seem to happen, just switch off ip6.int
anyway.  That should encourage (at least a bit) folks to run shut down
their 6bone swamps.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

---

From: Gert Doering <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:30:35 +0100

Hi,

> remember dates I think that 6/7/2008 is better.

Shutting down ip6.int has nothing to do with renumbering 6bone nodes.

This is about reverse DNS only...

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  58081  (57882)

SpaceNet AG                 Mail: [email-masked]
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299

---

From: Daniel Roesen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:24:22 +0100

> anyway.  That should encourage (at least a bit) folks to run shut down

Amen. I see no real problem in just shutting down ip6.int. We should
get rid of it as quickly as possible. Those who care abour reverse
DNS will already have ip6.arpa delegations or be very quick in getting
one.

Regards,
Daniel

---

From: David Malone <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:29:12 +0000

> less) people who wouldn't be otherwise bothered to change from ip6.int 

Is it my imagination, or are chunks of the ip6.int tree still broken
by various odd deligations? y.ip6.int and z.ip6.int don't seem to
agree with other name servers and are deligating to some lame
servers. I'd guess this is a pretty strong motivation to move to
ip6.arpa.

	David.

servers: y.ip6.int z.ip6.int
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    86400   IN      NS      auth03.ns.uu.net.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    86400   IN      NS      flag.ep.net.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    86400   IN      NS      munnari.oz.au.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    86400   IN      NS      ns.apnic.net.		Lame?
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    86400   IN      NS      ns.ripe.net.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    86400   IN      NS      ns3.nic.fr.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    86400   IN      NS      sunic.sunet.se.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    86400   IN      NS      svc00.apnic.net.	Lame?

servers: ns3.nic.fr flag.ep.net ns.ripe.net munnari.oz.au
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    432000  IN      NS      auth03.ns.uu.net.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    432000  IN      NS      munnari.oz.au.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    432000  IN      NS      ns.ripe.net.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    432000  IN      NS      ns3.nic.fr.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    432000  IN      NS      sec1.apnic.net.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    432000  IN      NS      sec3.apnic.net.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    432000  IN      NS      sunic.sunet.se.
7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int.    432000  IN      NS      tinnie.arin.net.

---

From: Alexander Koch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 07:55:13 +0100

> of the usage of ip6.int ?

Yes, I am all for it. I am sick of games here, and it might
speed things up, so let us try to make it work right, and
better, IMHO.

-ako

---

From: [email-masked] (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:23:24 +0900 (JST)

> ip6.arpa was set as a standard 2 years ago by RFC3152

	i believe it best to wait until e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa gets actually
	installed in some way (DNAME, two "master" config, whatever).
	at this point of time there's no e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa so 6bone address
	reverse resolution sorely depend on ip6.int.

itojun