On 03Nov, 2015, at 5:31 PM, Alain Durand <[email protected]> wrote:
> In the particular case of the communication between the CPE and the ISP > DNS recursive resolver, the two parties are within the same administrative > authority. Thus, the need to make a BCP is much lower. This can be seen > as simply an implementation issue. In other words, there are other > solutions that could be used, for example a translation of the DNS packets > from IPv4 to IPv6. Such a translation may or may not be optimal, but it > would work and, more importantly, would not break the DNS resolution and > would have no impact on the stability of the DNS system as a whole. Putting in a second DNS server that does nothing but forward everything just to translate v4 to v6 does indeed have an impact on stability if you try to do it at large scale. It impacts infrastructure costs, performance and potentlally confuses geo-ip/cdn. It also adds complexity in debugging.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
