> > > In any > > > case, the only way a DNS server should return a SL in a response is if > > > the query was received on a SL. This is the only reasonable way for the > > > server to know if the answer is usable. > > > > it doesn't work in general, because the query could be from a cache > > that doesn't know anything about SL. > > > > putting limited-scope addrs in DNS is a Bad Idea, period. > > No. > > Putting limited-scope addrs in DNS is a bad idea *unless* > you have a way to uniquely identify the scope.
since there is no notion of a scope identifier in the Internet architecure, what you are saying is tantamount to saying that putting limited-scope addresses in the DNS is a bad idea. > Now might be a good time to raise the idea again except I won't > tie it to A6. > > <ownername> SA <IPV6 address> <scopename> > > SA scoped address > scopename is a domainname choosen to be globally unique. > global addresses have a scopename of ".". > > the conversion from scopename to scopeid / zoneid is a > *local* resolution problem for the machine. great - so let's add a lot of complexity to every application just so we can get no additional functionality and reduced reliability. let's stamp out SL addresses, now. Keith -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
