To:
itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino)
Cc:
Alain.Durand@Sun.COM, dnsop@cafax.se
From:
bill <bmanning@karoshi.com>
Date:
Wed, 12 Nov 2003 07:50:03 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To:
<20031112104452.ABFC889@coconut.itojun.org> from "Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino" at Nov 12, 2003 07:44:52 PM
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: DNS discovery
> > > > too bad we could not reach consensus on DNS dicovery. i will do > > > IPv6 tutorial at LACNIC next week, and again i will need to tell > > > participants that there's no standard mechanism for DNS server > > > configuration. > > I'm not at IETF this week, but I'm following this from home. > > > > Your last statement is not 100% true. We already have DHCPv6 as an RFC. > > The DHCPv6-lite is fundamentally a collection of hints to create a > > simplified > > implementation. So, there is already a standardized solution. > > by "no standard mechanism" i meant the lack of consensus in DNS server > configuration mechanism. yes, you are right, dhcpv6 is already an RFC. > > itojun other than the badness w/ wka, I fail to see the need to continue w/ this "tempest in a teapot". Both RA and DHCP will provide an IP address to a node that seeks for help. presume that both are implemented... in the case of one, the node gets one(or more) IP addreses and a DNS server list. in the case of both, the node gets one or more IP addresses and a DNS server list. Thanks to Richard, source address selection is well understood. just merge the DNS list and we are done... yes? --bill #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.