nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
From: Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 11:44:52 -0700
But you don't have to look far before you hit snags like this: https://www.norid.no/en/om-domenenavn/regelverk-for-no/vedlegg-f/
I just sent the following to them: I’m writing about your name server requirements page: https://www.norid.no/en/om-domenenavn/regelverk-for-no/vedlegg-f/ I think that requirement 4: Accessible name servers Name servers must be permanently connected to the Internet, and must have a permanently assigned (fixed) IPv4 address. The name servers may also have an IPv6 address, and this too must be permanently assigned as required for the IPv4 address. The name servers must be connected to a stable and reliable infrastructure. is somewhat out of date relevant to current best internet practices… At the very least, IPv6 should no longer be options. Ideally, IPv4 should be optional. Suggest you send something similar. Owen
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC John Curran (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Masataka Ohta (Sep 14)
- Message not available
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Michael Thomas (Sep 15)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 15)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Michael Thomas (Sep 15)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Carsten Bormann (Sep 16)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Mark Tinka (Sep 13)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 13)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Bill Woodcock (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC John Levine (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Fred Baker (Sep 11)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Niels Bakker (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Bjørn Mork (Sep 10)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Mark Andrews (Sep 10)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 19)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC sronan (Sep 06)
- if not v6, what? Michael Thomas (Sep 05)
- Re: if not v6, what? Grant Taylor via NANOG (Sep 05)