nanog mailing list archives
Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted
From: David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 12:01:36 -0700
Ed, On May 29, 2007, at 9:22 AM, Edward Lewis wrote:
First - "the way you ask for names" is not different at the application level, it is different in the "layer" in which you find where to shoot packets.
Right. The problem is, the methodology by which you shoot packets may or may not work.
If the user types in the domain label (like "nanog") and the application then adds on TLDs and such, the application would have to try the likely set of IPv6 labels to pre-pend.
What a horrible idea. Applications automatically pre- or appending crap to domain name labels shouldn't be done, period.
As far as any other encoding of the name, whether IPv6 is working is something that the encoder cannot know as the code will probably be run from different points of the collective IP4 and IP6 network.
Exactly. And since it is impossible to know whether or not there is actual IPv6 connectivity to a site that is advertising AAAA records, you get into situations where you get a connection attempt, timeout, retry, etc., resulting in people getting directives like the one Leo pointed to.
The IPv6 Internet is a different network than the IPv4 Internet. Same names invites confusion and unhappiness.
Rgds, -drc
Current thread:
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted, (continued)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Leo Vegoda (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Nathan Ward (May 29)
- IPv6 Deployment (Was: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Donald Stahl (May 29)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment (Was: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment (Was: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Donald Stahl (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment (Was: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Kevin Loch (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment (Was: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 30)
- why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Edward Lewis (May 29)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted David Conrad (May 29)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Edward Lewis (May 29)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted David Conrad (May 29)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 30)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Nathan Ward (May 30)
- RE: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (May 30)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Nathan Ward (May 30)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 30)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 30)
- 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Jeroen Massar (May 30)
- Re: 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Mike Leber (May 30)