[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> >     chairs,
> >     i would like to get some guidance on how to proceed with my
document
> >     draft-itojun-ipv6-nodeinfo-revlookup-00.txt.  i would like to
publish
> >     it as an informational/experimental RFC.  which wg is
appropriate,
> >     or should i pursue it as individual submission?
> >
> >     i understand pushbacks against icmpv6 node information query 
> >     (which should be addressed separately), and against non-DNS name
> >     mapping in general.
> 
>       just to make sure - i don't mean to replace PTR with 
> it, it can be used together with PTR.  it is an interesting situation 
> if you get answer from both, but anyway...

One application for this could be a reverse dnsserver who doesn't know
the
PTR for a certain IPv6 address it serves the delegation for. It could
then
send this icmp nodeinfo request to the endpoint, which is very probably
quite
close networkwise and use that as a response. Ofcourse it could check
first if
the forward exists and/or that the reverse matches a specified set of
host/domainnames.

Ofcourse this setting depends on the operator of the dns and network.
But IMHO it's easier to implement as it either avoids one to setup a
dhcp
server to update the reverse zone or to distribute the keys for secure
reverse dns updates.

Greets,
 Jeroen

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to