Hello,
recently I was very surprised, when I found that there is an existing
ip6.arpa. domain, where the reverse IPv6 nibble format is delegated to
the registries.
I found no mail or announcement anywhere that from now on ip6.arpa should be
used for the reverse nibble format. Is that a fact, or is ip6.arpa just a
global testing scenario that is confusing me?
I know that ip6.arpa should be used instead of ip6.int for political reasons,
but I always expected to stay the nibble format in ip6.int and the bit-string
labels to appear in ip6.arpa someday.
Well, ok, now that the bit-string labels are to be changed to experimental,
that might be not possible anymore. But I'm not sure if it such a good idea
to just change the zones.
Right now there is a well established and well working tree under ip6.int.
If there will grow a second tree under ip6.arpa now, things might become
very confusing.
As a resolver, I don't know if I have to lookup the name for my IPv6 address
starting with .arpa or starting .int. If I lookup in the wrong tree, I might
get no answer, while the correct one is in the other tree. Yes, I could
lookup in both trees, but if the answers differ, which one is the correct one?
Is there a solution for this? What is the current policy? Maybe I am confused
because I missed something?
So long,
Christian
--
JOIN - IP Version 6 in the WiN Christian Schild
A DFN project Westfaelische Wilhelms-Universitaet Muenster
Project Team email: Zentrum fuer Informationsverarbeitung
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Roentgenstrasse 9-13
http://www.join.uni-muenster.de D-48149 Muenster / Germany
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED],phone: +49 251 83 31638, fax: +49 251 83 31653
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
