On 2008-08-06 04:57, Tony Li wrote: > > > |> It would seem like it would be no different than today. If > |one had a host > |> without a FQDN, then you would need to refer to it using a > |full 128 bit > |> locator and identifier. > | > |Provided there are some hosts without FQDNs, does that mean we need a > |separate id/locator resolution infrastructure except the > |current DNS system? > > > Not at all. Such systems would be reachable via their explicit /128, just > like today. This is just pure legacy IPv6 functionality.
<obscenity> You can always fabricate a synthetic FQDN-like name for such an address, if a new FQDN-based API requires it. Mine right now could be 200282d8267c00000000000082d8267c.map6.arpa for example. </obscenity> Brian -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
