On Fri, 19 Jan 2001, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date: 18 Jan 2001 09:01:14 -0000
> From: "D. J. Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> | Is there some other claimed benefit of A6?
>
> It is certainly possible to set up some horrid indirections which
> cause lots of extra work with A6, as it is with NS or MX.
Yes, but with A6 records, the number of queries is bounded by the length
of an IPv6 address, unless you use a lot of 0-length records. And DNAME
records aren't that great of an issue; half the reverse-resolution in the
current Internet is broken and nobody seems too concerned about fixing
it.
One other thing to keep in mind is that unlike an endless chain of
glueless NS records, A6 records will, in general, chain to other records
in the same zone and thus a significant part of the chain will be returned
on each query. Thus, NS chains require much more work to resolve and
should not be compared to A6 chains. It shouldn't take more than 2 or 3
queries to resolve a full A6 chain. In all likelyhood, prefixes for
popular providers and services will remain cached, and resolving the names
of virtual hosts and hosts on the same network will only take a single
query, just as they do now with A records. -Nathan
--
+-------------------+---------------------+------------------------+
| Nathan Lutchansky | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Lithium Technologies |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| I dread success. To have succeeded is to have finished one's |
| business on earth... I like a state of continual becoming, |
| with a goal in front and not behind. - George Bernard Shaw |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
