> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Leibrand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 1:36 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: The purpose of ULA-G/C
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> Not to pick on James' post, but several have mentioned that
> >> large routing realms would be one reason to require ULA-G/C
> >> and it has not yet been suggested that the reverse DNS could
> >> itself be thought of as a "large routing realm" of sorts
> >> (depending on how applications use the information they find
> >> there). ULA-G/C would ideally allow collision-free population
> >> of the reverse DNS even with O(10^6) or more delegations.
> >>     
> >
> > Not to pick on Fred's post, but making local reverse DNS globally
> > accessible is not recommended.  It exposes information which is
> > better kept private.  Fred believes that it will make for
> > seamless integration when two organizations decide to merge their
> > local networks.  It would probably make the reverse DNS aspect of
> > such a merger more seamless, but it certainly won't make any
> > other aspect any easier.  Given that considerable planning will
> > go into all the other aspects of such a merger (securing the virtual
> > connections, bypassing just the right amount of firewalling,
> > provisioning backup links), the effort saved on making reverse DNS
> > work seems negligible.                       -- George Mitchell
> >   
> 
> So it sounds to me like this particular application, at least in your 
> case, would be better served by ULA-L.  However, there are 
> lots of other 
> applications, that don't involve enterprise mergers, but private 
> internetworking, that would benefit from the ability to get globally 
> registered ULA-G space and delegate ip6.arpa DNS authority to 
> globally 
> reachable DNS servers.

Not all "organizations" will be so difficult to merge as George
is describing. This depends entirely on what is your definition
of organization/enterprise/site, and is there a one-size-fits all?

Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Reply via email to