Network Working Group R. Bush
Request for Comments: 3152 RGnet
BCP: 49 August 2001
Updates: 2874, 2772, 2766, 2553, 1886
Category: Best Current Practice
Delegation of IP6.ARPA
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This document discusses the need for delegation of the IP6.ARPA DNS
zone, and specifies a plan for the technical operation thereof.
1. Why IP6.ARPA?
In the IPv6 address space, there is a need for 'reverse mapping' of
addresses to DNS names analogous to that provided by the IN-ADDR.ARPA
zone for IPv4.
The IAB recommended that the ARPA top level domain (the name is now
considered an acronym for "Address and Routing Parameters Area") be
used for technical infrastructure sub-domains when possible. It is
already in use for IPv4 reverse mapping and has been established as
the location for E.164 numbering on the Internet [RFC2916 RFC3026].
IETF consensus was reached that the IP6.ARPA domain be used for
address to DNS name mapping for the IPv6 address space [RFC2874].
2. Obsoleted Usage
This document deprecates references to IP6.INT in [RFC1886] section
2.5, [RFC2553] section 6.2.3, [RFC2766] section 4.1, [RFC2772]
section 7.1.c, and [RFC2874] section 2.5.
In this context, 'deprecate' means that the old usage is not
appropriate for new implementations, and IP6.INT will likely be
phased out in an orderly fashion.
Bush Best Current Practice [Page 1]
RFC 3152 Delegation of IP6.ARPA August 2001
3. IANA Considerations
This memo requests that the IANA delegate the IP6.ARPA domain
following instructions to be provided by the IAB. Names within this
zone are to be further delegated to the regional IP registries in
accordance with the delegation of IPv6 address space to those
registries. The names allocated should be hierarchic in accordance
with the address space assignment.
4. Security Considerations
While DNS spoofing of address to name mapping has been exploited in
IPv4, delegation of the IP6.ARPA zone creates no new threats to the
security of the internet.
5. References
[RFC1886] Thomson, S. and C. Huitema, "DNS Extensions to support IP
version 6", RFC 1886, December 1995.
[RFC2553] Gilligan, R., Thomson, S., Bound, J. and W. Stevens,
"Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6", RFC 2553,
March 1999.
[RFC2766] Tsirtsis, G. and P. Srisuresh, "Network Address
Translation - Protocol Translation (NAT-PT)", RFC 2766,
February 2000.
[RFC2772] Rockell, R. and R. Fink, "6Bone Backbone Routing
Guidelines", RFC 2772, February 2000.
[RFC2874] Crawford, M. and C. Huitema, "DNS Extensions to Support
IPv6 Address Aggregation and Renumbering", RFC 2874, July
2001.
[RFC2916] Faltstrom, P., "E.164 number and DNS", RFC 2916,
September 2000.
[RFC3026] Blane, R., "Liaison to IETF/ISOC on ENUM", RFC 3026,
January 2001.
Bush Best Current Practice [Page 2]
RFC 3152 Delegation of IP6.ARPA August 2001
6. Author's Address
Randy Bush
5147 Crystal Springs
Bainbridge Island, WA US-98110
Phone: +1 206 780 0431
EMail: randy@psg.com
Bush Best Current Practice [Page 3]
RFC 3152 Delegation of IP6.ARPA August 2001
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Bush Best Current Practice [Page 4]
RFC, FYI, BCP