> There is no specification on the relationship of the queries is it
> first match, match all that apply, or some other one.
>
> Then there is the issue of error reporting, if there is a query for
> first A6 and secondly A, and A6 does not exist is but A does is this
> an error or not ?
If there are no deployed software that implements the multiple query
feature, would there be a window for actually specifying some working
semantics for it now? The goals being
- detection the old servers that don't support multiple query
("format error" seems to be a tell tale from some?)
- minimise the transactions for AAAA,A,A6 (it would be such a neat
package, with one hostname appearing only once using the DNS
compression...)
- define rules how to reply in case not all queries succeed (the
particular goal being the needs of IPv4/IPv6 transition). Can think
few starters
- if all are in cache, return all
- if some are in cache, return them separately, but
proceed with query
- if some name results error, and some not, perhaps return a
separate error reply for them?
- wouldn't multiple queries be more clean for some other purposes
too? Query A or MX? (instead of messy "addional section..." :-)
--
Markku Savela ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Technical Research Centre of Finland
Multimedia Systems, P.O.Box 1203,FIN-02044 VTT,http://www.vtt.fi/tte/staff/msa/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
