Stuart Cheshire wrote:
> [*] If you think it’s stupid to suggest a host might not treat “127.0.0.1” as
> meaning loopback, why is that any more stupid than suggesting that a host
> might not treat “localhost” as meaning loopback? Both are just as arbitrary.
As far as I can tell, "let 127.0.0.1 be loopback" is more stupid because
RFC 1122 states that addresses of the form 127.0.0.0/8 MUST be used for
loopback traffic, while the considerations for "let localhost be
loopback" in RFC 6761 §6.3 use non-mandatory language.
DNSOP mailing list