Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Define/allocate "same.arpa" ?

Nice idea.
An alternative would be, as I think Brian suggested, something else in ::/96.

    > Semantic: May be used by any application where the recipient can deduce
    > a prior hostname (or in the absence of the hostname an IP/IPv6 address)
    > from the context in which it receives a URL with hostname "same.arpa".
    > That hostname should then be used to connect to this URL. URL responders 
are
    > assumed to recognize and accordingly react to a "same.arpa" URL.

    > "same.arpa" can have arbitrary, application specific subdomain.
    > ---

    > The question really if in our use-case we will actually save 
significantly.
    > If the only benefit is saving bytes on the wire, it's a bit underhwlming.
    > The use of a generic hostname would be a lot more attractive if it would
    > help to solve other problems too.

So, it's not just about saving bytes.
It also indicates when the host part should *not* be taken literally, but
must be derived.  Particularly the case for forwarded/proxied things over v6-LL.
It could be that there are replies to core?rt= which have names which are to
be reached normally.   I'm not sure if it is valid for server X to refer to
server Y.

A concern is DTLS and DNS-ID checks.
{,c}BRSKI has special cases for this part.

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to