May I observe that most of the issues Dan are rising result from a specific approach to anti-poison, which is to rely strictly on the name hierarchy? I don't know who decided on that approach, but it clearly has the consequence of breaking existing practice, such as name servers located in another domain. That existing practice had been going on for quite a long time -- back in 1988, many of the name servers for "inria.fr" were located in ".edu". There is no mention anywhere that name server have to belong to the same hierarchy as the served domain. So, instead of asking everybody on earth to revise their delegation, it is probably avisable to make the anti-poison code a little bit smarter. Now, this is probably a subject for the DNS group, not IPNG. -- Christian Huitema -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
