>On the other hand, saying "no-one will need to renumber more frequently than
>once a month, as we'll always be able to let people keep their old addresses
>that long during a transition" doesn't mean that the renumbering event can be
>allowed take a month to be completed (a transition is usually going to be two
>renumbering events, neither of which should take anything like a half month
>even).
sorry if any of my past draft/presentations/postings/whatever sounded
like that. i was trying to analyze the minimal possible frequency
for renumber, so that we can understand what is the true requirement
to IPv6 DNS records. i should make it clearer next time.
the fact i've learned is that, once we advertise a DNS record
(with old /48 prefix we are trying to get rid of), we cannot remove
them till TTL for these record expires (since the record may be
cached somewhere in the world). the "frequency of renumber" analysis
is the extreme case for this.
if we are going to use fragmented A6 records, we really need to
diagnose relationship between the following items:
- minimal possible frequency for renumber event
- timing parameter for DNS, including record TTL, (accumulated) query
delays for each fragments, and such.
the delay analysis is highly critical, IMHO (there were clarification
from Rob, but it still does worry me and i plan to do more diagonsis).
>Yes, the NS records are (at the very least in the medium term, and perhaps
>forever) going to have to be associated with names where the benefits of
>A6 are unlikely to be achieved. For some truly huge organisations there
>may be 30 or 40 systems running as published nameservers (nameservers
>running not listed in any NS records don't count of course). Each of those
>may have half a dozen A6 0 records associated with them perhaps (just guessing
>at averages). So, there could be 200-300 records in addition to a few
>"prefix" A6 records to be updated when a prefix changes. This still seems
>manageable to me, and still a big win over having to update tens of thousands
>of AAAA records.
to help signing zone file with mixture of "A6 0" and "A6 x" (x != 0)
we at least need a better signing tool... with the current BIND9 tool
we can only sign the whole zone.
and again, zone signing cost analysis has to take a lot of things
into account, like timing constraints, deployment issues and
reality in needs of renumber...
itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
