> I see Thomas' argument for tolerating occasional use of AAAA entries in the
> global DNS for ULAs - but it seems that it leads to too many complications
> to be recommended. Since I'm sure the IETF isn't ready yet to endorse the
> reality of split DNS deployment, wouldn't it be best to say that ULA-Cs
> SHOULD NOT be included in the global DNS? (And that is a significant
> difference in scope and intent compared with PI.)

Note: a key question is whether the RIRs (as they hand out ULA-C
blocks) allow PTRs to be inserted in the DNS. They either do or they
don't. Saying folk "SHOULD NOT" doesn't answer a key question
definitively.

Note: we have no say/control over whether AAAA records contain
ULAs. End sites can (and will) do what they want here; we have no way
of preventing that (though we can recommend they don't and explain why
it may not be a good idea).

Thomas

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to