>https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheshire-sudn-ipv4only-dot-arpa
><https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheshire-sudn-ipv4only-dot-arpa>
>From Section 6.2:
3. Name resolution APIs and libraries MUST recognize 'ipv4only.arpa'
as special and MUST give it special treatment. Regardless of any
manual client DNS configuration, DNS overrides configured by VPN
client software, or any other mechanisms that influence the
choice of the client's recursive resolver address(es) (including
client devices that run their own local recursive resolver and
use the loopback address as their configured recursive resolver
address) all queries for 'ipv4only.arpa' and any subdomains of
that name MUST be sent to the recursive resolver learned from the
network via IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS
Configuration [RFC6106] or via DNS Configuration options for
DHCPv6 [RFC3646].
First we introduce ipv4only.arpa as a hack to avoid creating/deploying a
suitable mechanism to communicate the NAT64 translation prefix. That's fine
with me.
But when that hack then requires changes to every possible DNS stub resolver
implementation in the world, there is something seriously wrong.
So if this in indeeed required to make RFC7050 work then it is better to
formally deprecate RFC7050 and focus on other ways to discover the
translation prefix.
It seems that at least one already exists (RFC7225) so not much is lost.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
