In message <[email protected]>, Ted Lemon writes: > On Feb 26, 2013, at 9:21 AM, Fernando Gont <[email protected]> wrote: > > If we cannot do that, but can spec functionality in, say, home routers, > > then something along the lines of what I sketched in my previous email > > might make more sense. > > I dont think it cuts that way. If we specify a system for doing this, and i > t gets general support in home gateways, particularly if it's supported by at > least some operating systems, then we will probably see more implementations > follow the spec. So we should choose the solution we want, not settle for > something. > > I don't mean to suggest that what you've proposed isn't a good solution; simp > ly that we should prefer it because it's a better solution, if it is, not bec > ause it's more likely to see widespread deployment. At this stage in the li > fe of IPv4, SunOS didn't even have a built-in DNS resolver, and had determine > d that Yellow Pages was the way to do naming. (NIS, for those of us still o > ld enough to remember SunOS, but not old enough to remember YP.)
SunOS always has a DNS resolver. It was the BIND 4.8 code. Whether hostname lookups where configured to use it or not was another matter. > As for "not needing authoritative DNS in the homenet," I think we've generall > y agreed that we at least need it so we can publish names externally; the rea > l question is how we arrange for that to happen. I think if we need it at a > ll, we might as well just use it, and not develop a new protocol suite to do > homenet naming. > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
