The level 1 compliance stuff is only simple in the case of a single subnet. As soon as you have routers between the client and the server, you have to do something to get the packets across the router. I suppose we could have a discussion about whether magic unicast addresses (which are really a limited special case of anycast) are better or worse than multicast, but I doubt that such a discussion would change any minds.
The place where I do see a real difference is that draft-ietf-ipv6-dns-discovery-04 tacks new functions (service discovery and configuration) onto DNS. DNS was not really designed for this, and while it's certainly possible (RFC-1925 2.(3)) I think it's better to use a protocol that was designed for these tasks, particularly if by doing so one also builds an infrastructure that makes it easier to solve other problems (eg, configuring NTP). -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
