Subject: Re: v4/v6 dns thoughts? Date: Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:01:15AM -0400 Quoting Andrew Parnell (andrew@parnell.ca):
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
I also don't recommend doing the foo.v4/foo.v6 thing in your forwards. There's really no advantage to do it. Most tools either have separate IPv4/IPv6 variants or have command-line switches for address-family control if you care.
For most tools that I ordinarily use, I would certainly agree with this. The only exception might be from a web browser; while there are ways that they can be reconfigured to only use certain IP versions in certain cases, it is probably more straightforward to use www.ipvN.domain.tld or a similar name.
For reverse DNS, I completely agree that there is no reason to use a different name.
While I am no enemy to /56 allocations (cross-thread alert!) I for the most part tend to agree with Owen and would so here too. Possibly with the addition of separate names in a subdomain for trouble-shooting. Selecting protocol is something best done slightly lower in the stack. I did so with $INCLUDE directives[0] at a former employer. For routers, where it matters much more than for end-user stuff like web servers. -- Måns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina MN-1334-RIPE +46 705 989668 DIDI ... is that a MARTIAN name, or, are we in ISRAEL? [0] Like so: $ORIGIN isp.tld. $INCLUDE "file-with-AAAA-records-without-FQDN" $INCLUDE "file-with-A-records-without-FQDN" $ORIGIN v4.isp.tld. $INCLUDE "file-with-A-records-without-FQDN" $ORIGIN v6.isp.tld. $INCLUDE "file-with-AAAA-records-without-FQDN"