[141651] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Roesen)
Fri Jun 10 03:11:33 2011
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 09:11:28 +0200
From: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinCTkwx91ZrfgJ_g6-G=J0kKzAQ9g@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 06:39:18PM -0400, Jeff Hartley wrote:
> We've been using two workarounds:
> 1. Separate DNS resolvers (both BIND 9.8; one DNS64 and the other
> DNS6). Have the client provisioning system assign the appropriate DNS
> server IPs (dual-stack to anycast set 1, v6-only to anycast set 2).
> 2. Use range-specific views to determine whether or not to apply DNS64
> (this setup isn't standard BIND, though).
>
> One is a kludge, and the other is vendor-specific, but they work.
Not for SLAAC environments and others where there is no mandatory
endpoint registration. E.g. residential LANs.
Best regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
