Hi Daniel, Actually, there was a long discussion in the mailing list to argue to use FQDN or AAAA address. I personally support to use only AAAA record in the dhcpv6 option, but some operators prefer to use FQDN for more flexibility. As you pointed out, this flexibility does come with cost. We leave the AAAA selection process undefined because each ISP may have slightly different requirement for LB. However, this also causes undefined behavior for off-the-shelf home gateway with ds-lite. If an ISP decided to use plain IPv6 address, it must make sure each FQDN only returns one AAAA record.
B.R., Yiu On 5/28/11 8:42 AM, "Daniel Roesen" <[email protected]> wrote: >[1] now you need working IPv6 DNS resolution to get IPv4 connectivity up >and running (ARGH!), adding unnecessary complexity in B4 initialization >and nondeterministic B4 behaviour in regard of AAAA choice, making any >load balancing mechanism based on returning multiple AAAA infeasible due >to possible biassing. While load balancing could have been achieved via >plain IPv6 address DHCPv6 option just fine, leaving it up to the DHCPv6 >server issuing AFTR addresses in a balanced fashion. _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
