On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 19:22, Carl Brewer wrote: > Fernando Gont wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm just about to write a brief explanation about the RRs that need to > > be added to the ones described in RFC 1034 / 1035, in order to add > > support for IPv6. > > > > I've read RFC 3363, and it recommends that RFC 1886 stay on standards > > track and be advanced, and to move RFC 2874 to Experimental status. > > > > Shall I make comments on AAAA records, and don't even mention A6 records? > > You want to mention them, but mention that they've been shelved, > cite the RFC that explains why :)
Which one would that be? I can't find any particular RFC, or actual standards-related document about A6. I certainly know about DNAME, but I can't find any document on that either at the moment. As far as I knew, A6 wasn't shelved, only DNAME. I can understand DNAME, but not A6. A6 can be incredibly useful, and it's does /not/ pose as many problems as people think it does (at least, problems that aren't easily solved). _______________________________________________ 6bone mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.isi.edu/mailman/listinfo/6bone
