[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Next steps on the IPv6 Node requirements draft



Itojun,

I guess you missed the "more likely" part of my sentence.
I agree we don't have any standard wrt DNS registration of 
autoconfigured
addresses, and the current deployment practices show that it is a pain
to do it either manually or with dnsupdate (you have a key distribution 
problem),
so the reality is that they are seldom published and are not likely to 
resolve.

	- Alain.


On Thursday, June 19, 2003, at 07:04  PM, itojun@iijlab.net wrote:

>> 	- There are reverse DNS issues. They may point to 2 different names 
>> or
>> 	  more likely, the stateless autoconfigured address won't resolve to
>> 	  a name, where the DHCP one will. As default address selection does
>> 	  not (yet?) say to prefer the DHCP one, logs and/or (very) weak
>> security/authentication
>> 	  mechanisms based on DNS reverse lookup will work randomly.
>
> 	we don't have any standard wrt DNS registration of autoconfigured
> 	addresses, so you can't say that "stateless autoconfigured addresse
> 	won't resolve to a name".  the end node could register PTR record
> 	by DNS dynamic update, for instance.
>
> itojun

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------