> I am told that draft has been revved again in response to discussion on
> the list.
>
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-jabley-dnsext-eui48-eui64-rrtypes-05
>
> Please direct your attention to the security considerations section. If
> it turns out that informational documentation of the two RR-Type
> assignments remains controversial, I will likely withdraw my sponsorship
> of this draft.
the addition of
This document recommends that EUI-48 or EUI-64 addresses SHOULD NOT
be published in the public DNS.
alleviates my worst fears. though i wish it was a MUST NOT, i will not
insist.
thanks joe and joel.
randy
