On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 02:05:05PM -0800, Bill Manning wrote: > my appologies to Ted, you happend to be the nearest > lighting rod. Heh. I hadn't realized how sensitive people are to the whole concept of "hijacking the root". To me, I was thinking merely of taking the official root zone data and making it available on an IPv6 visible host, on site at the IETF meeting if that's what's necessary to make things work. I don't think of that as being particularly controversial, just an engineering expediency. What I had in mind is very different from taking the official root zone data and then adding or subtracting root entries, quite a different idea of "hijacking the root". Perhaps that's what you had in mind? In any case, I did some more looking into it, and it seems that 5 of the 13 official root name servers have IPv6 addresses, and while that doesn't necessarily mean global connectivity (some of them may only have very limited service to a small IPv6 island), it shouldn't be *that* hard for the IETF network ops to arrange a one or more tunnel(s) to root servers with IPv6 addresses. But in any case, the point is let's come up with the appropriate engineering solutions so that an IPv6-only network at an IETF meeting is in fact a viable and productive resource to the attendees. And if people continue to insist that it's not possible, what does that say about IPv6? As far as my having any authority as an official spokesmodel by virtue of my Sargeant-at-Arms role, I just got a great big chuckle out of that. That title and two dollars will get me a small coffee at Starbucks! - Ted _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf