On Jul 27, 2011, at 10:08 PM, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Jul 2011, George Michaelson wrote:
> 
>> I would support this latter approach William: I think we should seek WG 
>> adoption of three drafts
>> 
>> 1) the michaelson as112-ipv6 draft, aiming for at least one 01 spin to a 
>> small set of non-controversial V6 delegations, moving to WGLC and IANA asap.
>> 
>> 2) your as112-ipv4-cull draft, but shorn of the operational aspects, 
>> likewise rapid movement to WGLC and IANA
> 
> For the consideration of members of DNSOP to adopt as a working group item, 
> -01 of my draft has been submitted.
> 
>> 3) an AS112 operational draft more in the nature of 6304/5/bis
> 
> This one will follow a little later, I suspect more expanded than before.
> 
>> I would like to ask for WG adoption of AS112-IPv6 on that basis.
> 
> +1, especially since some as112 natives are getting restless.
> 

I made a suggestion at the mic in the f2f meeting, and then on the as112 
operators list -- there seems to be some support for it there, so I'm now doing 
it onlist…

How about simply making AS112 omniscient (know the answers for *all* space)? As 
decisions to have AS112 answer / not answer for zones get made, delegations can 
simply be added and removed. 

Obviously this would require synthesizing answers[0], and these servers cannot 
be used for answering recursive queries (and a few other minor issues) but this 
will (as far as I can see) solve the lameness / coordination issues...


W

[0]: Yes, yes i *did* feel dirty writing that….


> Thanks,
> 
> wfms
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to