At Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:13:45 -0700, Bob Hinden wrote: > > This is a IPv6 working group last call for comments on advancing the > following document as a Proposed Standard: > > Title: Well known site local unicast addresses for DNS resolver
I have written about this document at some length before, so I will summarize rather than repeating the entire thing. In brief: My main objection was and remains that this mechanism, if used, moves state away from the endpoints and into the network in a way that cripples the resolver's ability to keep track of which of the name servers it is using are performing properly, since the binding between any particular well-known-address and the name server behind it might change at any time and since there is no mechanism by which the resolver can find out that such a change has taken place. Furthermore, since this mechanism has enough weaknesses that even its authors only suggest this mechanism be used as a last resort, I fail to see what real purpose this mechanism serves. Finally, I remain unconvinced that this is a problem that the IPv6 WG ought to be trying to solve at all. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
