To:
bmanning@karoshi.com
cc:
Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@itojun.org>, <Mohsen.Souissi@nic.fr>, <dnsop@cafax.se>, <ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com>
From:
Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
Date:
Mon, 15 Jul 2002 09:53:44 +0300 (EEST)
In-Reply-To:
<200207150644.GAA14647@vacation.karoshi.com>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: RFC 1886 Interop Tests & Results
On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 bmanning@karoshi.com wrote:
> > I seem to recall there was some Best Current Practises about this 11
> > months ago.
> >
>
> ip6.arpa is fine for 2001:0:: but not for -anythhing-
> else. You might want to re-read the BCP. :)
You're probably referring to the IANA considerations:
--8<--
3. IANA Considerations
This memo requests that the IANA delegate the IP6.ARPA domain
following instructions to be provided by the IAB. Names within this
zone are to be further delegated to the regional IP registries in
accordance with the delegation of IPv6 address space to those
registries. The names allocated should be hierarchic in accordance
with the address space assignment.
--8<--
Nothing else seems to match. The second sentence is probably relevant
here.
How should an application writer know there are hidden messages in the BCP
("don't delegate to 6bone, make ip6.arpa useless")?
As 6bone have been delegated IPv6 address space, I think this could very
well be interpreted to include them too.
--
Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords