[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: "'Klaus Malorny'" <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>, ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 08:02:32 -0400
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: RE: IPv6, was: Nameserver MUST HAVE IP

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Klaus Malorny [mailto:Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:57 AM
>To: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
>Subject: IPv6, was: Nameserver MUST HAVE IP
>
>
>
>
>One short question regarding the appearance of "IPv6" in 3.4.2[2]. Is this
an
>address according to RFC 1886, i.e. a full 128 bit address/AAAA record, or
an
>address according to RFC 2874, i.e. a partial address with a prefix/A6
record
>chain, or any of both? Do we need to detail this in the requirements
document?

Just as there is no reference to the specification of an IPv4 address in the
requirements draft, the specification of an IPv6 address isn't a requirement
issue but a protocol specification issue.

Jumping ahead, though, I believe the proper reference to define IPv6 address
syntax for protocol purposes is RFC1883.  1886 and 2874 describe DNS
extensions to support IPv6 (that is, how the addresses are represented in
the DNS), which is probably something that may differ from registry to
registry.

<Scott/>


Home | Date list | Subject list