From: Jack Bates (no email)
Date: Wed Nov 19 2008 - 17:38:27 EST
Michael Sinatra wrote:
> If your reference to 2001:: addressing simply means "non-tunneled,
> globally routable IPv6 addressing," then I suppose it is okay. But
> please note that there is now a lot of native (non-tunneled), globally
> routable IPv6 addressing that is outside of 2001::/16. ARIN, for
> example, is allocating blocks out of 2607::/16 and there are quite a
> large number of prefixes elsewhere in the designated globally-routable
> 2000::/3 that are *not* 6to4 addresses.
heh, these days, lots of it is still tunneled, though through more
conventional means. But yes, I should have been more clear. Just too
used to seeing 2001::/16 and too lazy to figure out the proper
terminology (The original topic is something I've been heavily testing
lately while I figure out how closely I can get to customer edges and
how they will react).
> The reason I bring this up is that I have already seen certain
> applications, such as one for registering AAAA records for DNS servers
> in a certain TLD, that don't allow anything other than 2001::/16.
> (Fortunately that application was fixed quickly when those responsible
> were notified.) Just making sure others aren't careening toward making
> the same mistake.
Agreed, and thanks for correcting my post. Would hate for others to take
my offhanded comments on addressing and use them in production apps.