> Your logic doesn't make sense. In fact the app that needs a fixed > address should know that, and one that can live with a variable one > probably has no idea what address is being used anyway.
the problem is there's a large body of code out there written to assume fixed addresses because that's been the API for 20+ years. if we were starting from scratch I might agree with you. > > I have every confidence that apps that can make use of private > > addresses, will do so if we give them a uniform API to work with. > > > > Any app that doesn't need a forward or reverse record in DNS will work > with a private address, uh, no. DNS isn't the only way that apps get addresses, and some apps need stable addresses whether or not they're listed in DNS. > What you are > looking for is a simple way during address selection to know which > address is recorded in DNS. no. not even close. > > if you really want privacy to be the default, unplug your network. > > That is not what private addresses are for and you know it. Rather than > bash the new concept for being different, why not provide a constructive > proposal like a flag on the local address list to know which have been > recorded in DNS? because it wouldn't solve the problem. I already made a constructive proposal that does solve the problem. 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
