Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 16:53:40 +0300 (EEST) From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi> To: itojun@iijlab.net Cc: Robert <robert@chalmers.com.au>, 6bone <6bone@ISI.EDU>, ipv6users <users@ipv6.org>, freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204191651110.1190-100000@netcore.fi> In-Reply-To: <5288.1019217600@itojun.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 19 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > >In the forward/reverse zones on a 6to4 setup, should I have > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > >nanguo-v6 IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > >or > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > >nanguo IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > >When referring to the particular host ? > >Either works - but which is ... errr... correct? > > i recommend the latter, definitely. with the latter you will be able > to transition to IPv6 much smoother. That is true, but it may have it's drawbacks. Often, still, IPv6 connectivity is worse than with IPv4. People who are dual-stack will use IPv6 when trying to reach 'nanguo'. It may be more unoptimal yet. For conservative IPv6 adoption, I recommend the former (at least first). For more radical IPv6 adoption, and for non-production services, the latter is usually more suitable. YMMV. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.44.0204191651110.1190-100000>