To:
"BELOEIL Luc FTRD/DMI/CAE" <luc.beloeil@francetelecom.com>
Cc:
<dnsop@cafax.se>
From:
Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Date:
Tue, 29 Jul 2003 11:27:48 -0400
In-Reply-To:
<C331E5A29B51A84E9755E834A3E619D10F9F6F@ftrdmel1.rd.francetelecom.fr>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: proposal for a compromise on DNS discovery
Luc, At the top of page 2 of draft-ietf-ipngwg-dns-discovery-01.txt is the sentence: There are any number of ways that IPv6 hosts can discover information required to enable name resolution, in the absence of a DHCP server. which I read to mean that the document is explicitly describing mechanisms that do not use DHCP. Section 6.1 simply suggests the use of DHCP message formats in a new protocol for use between a host and a DNS server. draft-ietf-ipngwg-dns-discovery-01.txt expired in September, 2001. The most recent version, draft-ietf-ipv6-dns-discovery-06.txt, which describes the reserved site-local address mechanism, expired in February, 2003. The latter document also, indirectly, assumes that DHCP is not available. - Ralph At 01:56 PM 7/29/2003 +0200, BELOEIL Luc FTRD/DMI/CAE wrote: >Hi Raplh, > >thank you for that precision. > >draft-ietf-ipngwg-dns-discovery-01.txt had a whole section (6.1 DHCP) >concerning DHCP. But It seems some other points could also be added to >section 5 (Transport Mechanisms) so as to refer explicitly to DHCP. > >Do you think it would be valuable to work again on that draft? > >Luc > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : Ralph Droms [mailto:rdroms@cisco.com] > > > > > > What was missing in the original DNS discovery work is that > > it explicitly ruled out DHCPv6 a priori... > > > > - Ralph > > > > At 05:03 PM 7/28/2003 +0200, BELOEIL Luc FTRD/DMI/CAE wrote: > > > > > >Then what is(are) the solution(s): > > >- RA-based > > >- DHCPv6-lite > > >- Anycast Addresses for resolver DNS server > > >- SLP (I also like SLP, which already a RFC - Standards > > Track - !!! Does > > >anybody have a good point against SLP ?) > > >- well-known link-local addresses (+ DNS proxies...)?... > > > > > >There was a analysis made by the DNS Discovery Design Team > > in march 2001 > > >(draft-ietf-ipnwg-dns-discovery-01.txt). Wouldn't it be > > valuable to go > > >on or to restart such a work ? (instead of this no-end > > battle?) I must > > >have missed something concerning this old work. Could anyone give me > > >some pointers or summary? > > > > > >Luc > > > > > >#------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---------- > > ># To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>. > > > > #------------------------------------------------------------- > > --------- > > # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>. > > #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.