[97168] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathan Ward)
Mon Jun 4 00:22:26 2007
In-Reply-To: <16480.1180917828@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
From: Nathan Ward <nanog@daork.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 16:13:29 +1200
To: Nanog <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 4/06/2007, at 12:43 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 15:35:29 EDT, Donald Stahl said:
>
>> That said- your v6 support does not have to match your v4 support
>> to at
>> least allow you to begin testing. You could set up a single server
>> with v6
>> support, test, and not worry about it affecting production.
>
> If I read the thread so far correctly, Igor can't enable a single
> server
> with v6, because the instant he updates the DNS so an MX for his
> domain
> references a AAAA, that will become the preferred target for his
> domain
> from the entire IPv6 world, and he's gonna need a load balancer
> from Day 0.
Sounds fair enough to me.
The other mode would be to set up mail.ipv6.yahoo.com and have
customers use that for whatever protocol they send/receive mail with,
and not point an MX at an AAAA for the time being. However, that
means that you can't simply turn it off if it becomes a problem
(although, you could switch the AAAA out for an A), and when you end
up being able to do a "proper" IPv6 deployment you end up with
customers still caring about this legacy DNS entry. That, in short,
sounds painful.
--
Nathan Ward
