It tells you that AT&T don’t treat IPv6 on equal footing to IPv4 and nothing more.
There is nothing at the protocol level stopping AT&T offering a similar level of service. Don’t equate poor implementation with the protocol being broken. -- Mark Andrews > On 19 Sep 2021, at 07:19, Stephen Satchell <l...@satchell.net> wrote: > > I concur that the problem is not a routing hardware problem. It's a > perception problem with the various ISPs. I have fiber service with AT&T. > > My little server farm endpoints all have IPv6 addresses, including the edge > router. I also have a plan to allocate IPv6 addresses to my LAN devices, and > to protect the LAN devices from outside interference by rules in the NFTABLES > firewall that include connection tracking on outbound requests. (IPv4 will > still use NAT to keep nefarious people from probing my internals.) > > Specifically, when I was doing my mail server refresh (moving from Red Hat to > Canonical) I decided it was time to offer IPv6 connectivity in the mail > server to "future proof" my setup. That included adding AAAA records in my > DNS zone files. Failure! The issues: > > 1. I learned that there are no "static addresses" in IPv6, as far as AT&T > was concerned. By all appearances, though, the IPv6 /64 is relatively > static, for now, similar to the way that early cable modem deployments kept > the same IPv4 addresses. (Until the cable people started forcing changes on > DHCP lease renewal, that is.) > > 2. My request for PTR records was denied, which means I can't satisfy Best > Practices for a mail server in the IPv6 space. No PTR records, no > redirection of ip6.apra space, nothing. I include AT&T's refusal below. > > 3. I don't know how to get an IPv6 allocation from ARIN, how to request AT&T > to route it, or how to deal with the DNS server issues. Oh, I know how to > configure BIND9; I would prefer using a 24/7/365 provider. For example, my > master zone files are with Register.com, so if my circuit goes down the name > resolution still happens. Register.com appears not to provide reverse-DNS > PTR zone support (in6.arpa). A Google search turned up NOTHING for in6.arpa > hosting. > > That tells me that IPv6 is not "Internet Ready" for small users. Given the > level of FU responses I get trying to work with it, I will stop banging my > head against the wall. > > So I stick with IPv4, because that will be the "standard" until the day I > die, as far as I can tell. > > (I removed the AAAA record, so as not to confuse mail server that DO operate > IPv6.) > >> Subject: RE: Need IPv6 PTR record for my IPv6 mail server >> Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 12:52:53 +0000 >> From: Prov-DNS <prov-...@att.com> >> To: Prov-DNS <prov-...@att.com>, a...@satchell.net <a...@satchell.net> >> Hello We don't process DNS request on IPv6 addresses. We only process DNS >> request on IPv4 static assigned addresses. If you would like us to >> process a DNS request for you on a IPv4 address please provide the >> following information. >> IPv4 address you would like the record created for Host name you would > >> like that IP address pointed to > > >> Thanks >> Michael AT&T Prov-DNS >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Stephen Satchell <a...@satchell.net> >> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2021 5:42 PM >> To: DNSUpdates cB <g12...@att.com> >> Subject: Need IPv6 PTR record for my IPv6 mail server >> Here is the record I need inserted into your ip6.arpa DNS zone: > 2.3.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.c.d.d.0.b.9.7.0.0.7.1.0.0.6.2.ip6.arpa. 0 > IN PTR smtp.satchell.net. >> This is the result from the question section of a dig(1) request for the PTR >> record for my IPv6 address 2600:1700:79b0:ddc0::32, and the fully-qualified >> domain name of the server. >> You can verify the information using dig smtp.satchell.net AAAA and checking >> the reverse. >> This is the only server in my collection that needs the IPv6 pointer. >
