I haven’t tried the PTR thing yet, but I do have a small business client that has AT&T business internet and they were able to get a static /56 (For some reason, AT&T refused to do a /48, but we did push them on it.)
If it turns out they won’t do PTR or more likely NS for our ip6.arpa zone, then we’ll probably start looking for an alternative provider or get an HE /48 over a tunnel which will do PTR or NS records appropriately. Owen > On Sep 18, 2021, at 14:19 , 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.
