Keith Moore wrote: > so rather than trying to squeeze a protocol negotiation bit into > the address, maybe folks should be trying to add the necessary > information to DNS so that it can be verified by DNSSEC.
That can be done. For MIPv6 it just requires that we have fully deployed secure reverse DNS. > I realize it's ugly to add more frobs to DNS, but IMHO trying to > further constrain the use of the IPv6 address space is far uglier. The bit method is also a performance issue. Do we want a server to do a DNS lookup each and every time someone talking with it wants to do MIPv6 RO? Do we want to include DNS lookups in Secure ND? --Pekka Nikander -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
