On 21-feb-05, at 16:32, Brian Haberman wrote:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ draft-huston-ip6-int-01.txt
What is the purpose of this document anyway? ip6.int is deprecated, no need to beat a dead horse.
The goal is to get the registries to act asap on cleaning up the DNS hierarchy. If anyone has comments on this draft, the authors (and the IAB) would love to hear them!
As background, this draft is a part of a larger effort by the IAB to help get the registries all working from the correct set of RFCs.
Ok, I see. In that case, I would strongly recommend including the status of bitlabel delegations under ip6.arpa as per RFC 2874. Since this RFC is now "experimental" as I understand. Since it's hard to experiment without any delegations, it seems that there should be some form of bitlabel delegation.
If only we had a global IPv6 testbed where we could do experiments like this without getting in the way of production stuff...
On the other hand, even though the resolvers themselves don't seem to use bitlabels, there are still utilities such as "host" and "nslookup" floating around that do bitlabel lookups for IPv6 addresses, which isn't good.
The usefulness of an RFC like this would be to present the whole picture. The individual pieces are already out there (RFCs 3152 and 3596).
The june 1st date seems a bit ambitious. Why not stop new delegations immediately, and remove existing ones per 1-1-6 or 6-6-6?
_______________________________________________ 6bone mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.isi.edu/mailman/listinfo/6bone
